TN295 



MOB 



■■■■■ 
Hi 



jOu 



HH 



H 



H 



v-^-y <v^v v^-y v- f v v^-y v^ 


















r •ysi&f- ^. a^ /^w^ ^ c.v * 








^^ 



*o ' A V .f..^ " ^.co.^ ""■".£' .-.,%. 










> .^-. \/ /Jfe ^ .*' 




0* 



»<°* 







v-0 



./%. 




■•- * ,^/^i-.V c^.^t>o jf.tifaX /.^:^°o ,^ v 





«5°* 



»" ° v " ^ 



c>_ * 




,g* \s *^t:t*' a 









"oK 



* 



» ^ 




.<)* **i A 









o > 








^ .. 






V 












:- -^o« •' 






•>° ... V'^V c ^*^-%°° ^^^\/ v^^/ 







l V „ - a "^ A V «£. A ^ • • « % * ^^* 







V ^ o 



V i'l'.. *0 



"W 



£°* 







<. 







^ 




? . >L^L'* *> 



it \/ *v #&• \/ -M-- v** -M-\/ 



^"l 









A vs *^T1T 4 ' A 



.;ii-:-X ^°.i«t.^* ^.:«:..V ^.•j^-.'* 






4 ^ ^' o • 4,, ^ \*£*\<> **'^'\« ^ fr % 'T7f/V <V 



V.s* * 







^V^ 























/.^.:,\ 4**\c^/V ,/.^^>o .^V 



^\ 












<**.i^i-.%. .c°*..^i:..% .<**..^:,V c»*. «^:.*»o .,**' 



V ; > ^> V 










^- •AT 'rfCv8» A ^ A » ¥\Mk\ « ^te & *\ 




^oV^ 












^o ^7.s s A <* 










«, * ,^^> 









IC 


8933 



Bureau of Mines Information Circular/1983 




Manganese Nodule Resources of Three 
Areas in the Northeast Pacific Ocean: 
With Proposed Mining-Beneficiation 
Systems and Costs 

A Minerals Availability System Appraisal 
By C. Thomas Hillman 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 



Information Circular 8933 

Manganese Nodule Resources of Three 
Areas in the Northeast Pacific Ocean: 
With Proposed Mining-Beneficiation 
Systems and Costs 

A Minerals Availability System Appraisal 
By C. Thomas Hillman 




UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 
James G. Watt, Secretary 

BUREAU OF MINES 
Robert C. Horton, Director 



As the Nation's principal conservation agency, the Department of the Interior 
has responsibility for most of our nationally owned public lands and natural 
resources. This includes fostering the wisest use of our land and water re- 
sources, protecting our fish and wildlife, preserving the environmental and 
cultural values of our national parks and historical places, and providing for 
the enjoyment of life through outdoor recreation. The Department assesses 
our energy and mineral resources and works to assure that their development is 
in the best interests of all our people. The Department also has a major re- 
sponsibility for American Indian reservation communities and for people who 
live in Island Territories under U.S. administration. 






# 



This publication has been cataloged as follows: 



Hillman, C. Thomas 

Manganese nodule resources of three areas in the northeast Pacific 
Ocean. 

(Information circular / United States Department of the Interior, Bu- 
reau of Mines ; 8933) 

Bibliography: p. 38-40. 

Supt. of Docs, no.: I 28.27:8933. 

1. Manganese nodules— Pacific Ocean. 2. Ocean mining— Pacific 
Ocean. 3. Ore-dressing. I. Title. II. Series: Information circular (United 
States. Bureau of Mines) ; 8933. 

TN295.U4 [TN490.M3] 622s [553.4'629] 83-600014 



For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 



CONTENTS 



Page 



1 Abstract 1 

Introduction 2 

I Acknowledgments 3 

I Location and geography 5 

Geology 5 

Geological setting 5 

Deposit description 6 

Mineralogy 7 

Resources 8 

Discussion 8 

Grade and abundance estimates 8 

Minable resources 12 

Mining and processing technology 13 

Discussion 13 

Operational integration of a proposed recovery system 15 

Mining 16 

Transportation 20 

Slurry terminal 21 

Cuprion processing 23 

Manganese recovery 27 

Waste disposal 28 

Capital and operating costs 28 

Discussion 28 

Capital costs 29 

Operating costs 31 

Cost summary 32 

Financial analysis 33 

Production and supply 35 

Summary 37 

References 38 

Appendix A. — Discussion of abundance and resource estimates 41 

Appendix B. — Sample station locations, abundance estimates, and analyses for 

study areas A, B, and C 43 

ILLUSTRATIONS 



1. Location of the northeast Pacific high-grade zone and DOMES Sites A, B, 

and C 3 

2. Sediment map of the northeast Pacific Ocean, with locations of study 

areas A, B, and C 4 

3. Manganese nodule deposit in the northeast Pacific Ocean 6 

4 . Manganese nodule polished cross section 7 

5. Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in study area A.... Pocket 

6. Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in subarea AII(a) 10 

7. Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in study area B.... Pocket 

8. Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in subarea BIII(a).... 11 

9. Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in study area C... Pocket 

10. Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in subarea CI 12 

11. Hydraulic deep ocean mining system 17 

12. Plan view of slurry receiving terminal and pumping station 22 

13. Cuprion process flowsheet for recovery of nickel, copper, and cobalt.... 25 

14. Generalized flowsheet of a proposed ferromanganese plant 28 

1 5 . Pro j ect development schedule 34 



11 



TABLES 



Page 



1. Summary of mean elemental contents, study areas A, B, and C 9 

2. Average abundance and subarea size, study areas A, B, and C 9 

3. Estimated minable and recoverable resources, subareas All, Bill, and CI. 13 

4. Deposit characteristics affecting minability, ventures 1, 2, and 3 19 

5. Mining parameters for ventures 1, 2, and 3 20 

6. Characteristics of proposed 70,000-dwt nodule transports 20 

7. Summary of transportation data, ventures 1, 2, and 3 21 

8. Cuprion ammonia leach plant, major inputs and wastes 27 

9. Mine capital costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3 29 

10. Transportation capital costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3 29 

11. Cuprion and ferromanganese plant capital costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3.... 30 

12. Mine operating costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3 31 

13. Transportation operating costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3 31 

14. Cuprion and ferromanganese plant operating costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3.. 32 

15. Capital cost summary, ventures 1, 2, and 3 33 

16. Operating cost summary, ventures 1, 2, and 3 33 

17. Total commodity revenues, ventures 1, 2, and 3 35 

18. Projected rates of return, ventures 1, 2, and 3 35 

19. Comparison of U.S. consumption of nickel, copper, cobalt, and manganese 

with potential production from ventures 1, 2, and 3 36 

B-l. Subarea AI — location, abundance, and analytical data 43 

B-2. Subarea All — location, abundance, and analytical data 44 

B-3. Subarea AIII — location, abundance, and analytical data 47 

B-4. Subarea AIV — location, abundance, and analytical data 48 

B-5. Subarea AV — location, abundance, and analytical data 49 

B-6. Subarea AVI — location, abundance, and analytical data 50 

B-7. Study area A — location, abundance, and analytical data outside subareas. 51 

B-8. Subarea BI — location, abundance, and analytical data 52 

B-9. Subarea BII — location, abundance, and analytical data 53 

B-10. Subarea Bill — location, abundance, and analytical data 54 

B-ll. Study area B — location, abundance, and analytical data outside subareas. 56 

B-12. Subarea CI — location, abundance, and analytical data 57 

B-13. Subarea CII — location, abundance, and analytical data 59 

B-14. Study area C — location, abundance, and analytical data outside subareas. 60 



Ill 



UNIT OF MEASURE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS REPORT 
bbl/d barrel per day kn knot 

cm centimeter kW*h kilowatt hour 

meter 

square meter 
cubic meter 



cm z 


square centimeter 


m 


cm 3 


cubic centimeter 


m 2 


cm/s 


centimeter per second 


m 3 


d 


day 


min 


° C 


degree Celsius 


mm 


dwt 


deadweight ton 


m/s 


d/yr 


day per year 


MW 


g/cm 2 


gram per square centimeter 


nmi 


g/cm 3 


gram per cubic centimeter 


m 3 /min 


g/L 


gram per liter 


pet 


h 


hour 


t 


ha 


hectare 


t/d 


h/d 


hour per day 


t/h 


hp 


horsepower 


t/km 2 


kg/cm 2 
kg/d 
kg/m 2 
km 


kilogram per square centimeter 
kilogram per day 
kilogram per square meter 
kilometer 


t/yr 
vol pet 
wt pet 


km 2 


square kilometer 


yr 



minute 

millimeter 

meter per second 

megawatt 

nautical mile 

cubic meter per minute 

percent 

metric ton 

metric ton per day 

metric ton per hour 

metric ton per square 
kilometer 

metric ton per year 

volume percent 

weight percent 

year 



MANGANESE NODULE RESOURCES OF THREE AREAS IN THE NORTHEAST PACIFIC 
OCEAN: WITH PROPOSED MINING-BENEFICIATION SYSTEMS AND COSTS 

A Minerals Availability System Appraisal 
By C. Thomas Hillman 1 



ABSTRACT 

The practical concern of economic minability of large, high-grade man- 
ganese nodule deposits in the northeast Pacific Ocean is addressed in 
this Bureau of Mines report. Principal objectives are to (1) estimate 
tonnage and grade of deposits with significant potential and (2) de- 
scribe and estimate profitability of operations designed to mine and 
process deposits with greatest apparent potential. 

Analysis of data from over 800 ship stations identified three areas 
for detailed study. Average metal contents of these areas range 
from 1.30 to 1.45 wt pet nickel, 1.00 to 1.24 wt pet copper, 0.21 to 
0.26 wt pet cobalt, and 26.8 to 27.8 wt pet manganese. Estimated recov- 
erable nodule resources are 67.0, 66.9, and 148.8 million dry metric 
tons (t). 

A system to mine, transport, and process nodules from the three sites 
is described and costed. Although hypothetical, the system utilizes 
hydraulic mining and Cuprion (Kennecott) processing, which have been 
successfully tested at pilot scale. Nickel, copper, and cobalt are the 
three primary products, but ferromanganese is a considered option. 

Estimated capital requirements are approximately $1.5 to $1.7 billion 
for three-metal production. If ferromanganese were recovered, an addi- 
tional investment of about $130 million would be required. Operating 
costs range from $71 to $83 per dry metric ton of nodules without man- 
ganese, and from $103 to $123 per dry metric ton with ferromanganese. 
Discounted cash flow analyses predict low returns, ranging from 2.7 to 
5.2 pet with ferromanganese and from 4.1 to 6.0 pet without. 

1 Physical scientist, Western Field Operations Center, Bureau of Mines, Spokane, WA. 



INTRODUCTION 



Deep ocean manganese nodule deposits, 
representing a very large source of the 
metals nickel, copper, cobalt, and manga- 
nese, are the subject of continuing in- 
ternational controversy. The central 
issue is ownership and control, because 
the largest and highest grade deposits 
generally are in the deep ocean beyond 
territorial limits. Despite controversy, 
a substantial amount of exploration has 
occurred during the last 10 to 15 yr. 

Various mining consortia with U.S., 
Canadian, European, and Japanese partners 
have prospected large areas of the 
world's oceans, especially the region 
known as the northeast Pacific high-grade 
zone. This area extends from about 
110° W to 160° W longitude and 5° N to 
20° N latitude, and is presently the area 
of primary commercial interest. Indica- 
tions are that many potential minesites 
have been discovered and explored to 
varying degrees (28) . 2 Because of high 
exploration costs, uncertain political 
climate, and the competitive nature of 
the business, most information has been 
kept proprietary. This policy ,- although 
proper, fuels the ownership controversy, 
because there is a belief by many that 
manganese nodules represent a source of 
tremendous profit for those in a position 
to grasp it. The fact that large, high- 
grade deposits exist, however, does not 
guarantee profit can be attained from 
their exploitation. 

While much has been written concerning 
nodule resources, conceptual mine-process 
systems, and economics, no published work 
is available which addresses the question 
of profitability of mining a specific 

2 Underlined numbers in parentheses re- 
fer to items in the list of references 
preceding the appendixes. 



nodule deposit. Therefore, the purposes 
of this report are to analyze available 
information on deposits in the northeast 
Pacific high-grade zone in an attempt to 
identify areas of high grade and abun- 
dance, and determine their minability and 
profitability based on existing technol- 
ogy and economics. A final purpose, 
irrespective of profitability, is to ana- 
lyze the potential beneficial impacts 
nodule production could have on the U.S. 
supply of nickel, copper, cobalt, and 
manganese. 

The study was performed as part of the 
Bureau of Mines minerals availability 
program to inventory and assess the 
availability of nonfuel minerals. The 
basis for this program consists of evalu- 
ations of individual deposits. Each de- 
posit report normally includes geological 
and geographical descriptions , resource- 
reserve estimates, mining and beneficia- 
tion plans, and an economic analysis. 
These same elements are present in this 
report, which is in reality a specialized 
and expanded minerals availability depos- 
it report. 

Resource information was gathered dur- 
ing the past 5 yr, through Bureau of 
Mines grants to Scripps Institution of 
Oceanography and Washington State Univer- 
sity, and by contacts with personnel of 
the U.S. Geological Survey (26-28). Much 
data were developed as a spinoff of proj- 
ect DOMES (Deep Ocean Mining Environ- 
mental Study) carried out by the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
(NOAA). DOMES was a detailed investiga- 
tion of the deep ocean environment of 
three potential minesites (A, B, and C) 
and a determination of possible effects 
of nodule mining. Figure 1 shows the 
northeast Pacific high-grade zone and 
locations of the three DOMES sites. 




FIGURE 1. - Location of the northeast Pacific high-grade zone and DOMES Sites A, B, and C. 



Resource data consist of nodule assays 
(dry weight percent), populations (per- 
cent of seafloor covered with nodules), 
and abundances (weight per unit area) 
from more than 800 ship stations situated 
in three broad areas encompassing DOMES 
Sites A, B, and C (Fig. 2). Because of 
apparent high grade and abundance, spe- 
cific deposits within these areas are 
believed to have significant economic 
potential. A proposed system to mine, 
transport, and beneficiate nodules from 
these areas is described and costed. 



Although no attempt was made to opti- 
mize either capacity or location of 
processing facility, the system repre- 
sents a likely approach to recovery of 
these resources. A financial analysis, 
based on derived costs, was completed us- 
ing a Bureau of Mines mine simulator com- 
puter program (MINSIM4). A discussion of 
results precedes a short analysis of 
the potential for reducing U.S. depen- 
dence on imports of nickel, cobalt, and 
manganese. 



ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 



The author expresses appreciation to 
Dr. John Flipse, ocean mining consultant, 
College Station, TX; Benjamin V. Andrews, 
ocean transportation consultant, Menlo 



Park, CA; and Dr. Francis Brown, process 
engineer, EIC Corp., Newton, MA; who pro- 
vided technical and cost information. 




r f 






LOCATION AND GEOGRAPHY 



The northeast Pacific high-grade zone, 
presently the area of greatest commercial 
interest, stretches from south of Baja 
California at 110° W longitude to nearly 
160° W longitude south of Hawaii; it 
encompasses approximately 10 million km 2 . 
Study areas A, B, and C are about 4,600, 
3,800, and 3,300 km, respectively, south- 
west of Los Angeles, CA. The best de- 
posits generally lie between the promi- 
nent Clipperton and Clarion Fault zones . 

Climate in the entire region is typical 
of the trade winds zone. The northeast 
trade winds blow steadily, but moderate- 
ly, throughout the year (37) . Rainfall 
is slight, increasing somewhat near the 
equator. Tropical storms and typhoons, 
usually lasting 1 or 2 days, occur pri- 
marily in summer months. A 10-yr survey 
indicates an average of 3.6, 4.4, and 2.9 
storms per month for July, August, and 
September, respectively. The average for 
1966-75 was 15 storms per year. Air tem- 
peratures at sea level average 25° C for 
the year; monthly averages vary only a 
degree or two ( 48 ) . 

Surface currents in the region of 
interest are largely controlled by 



wind (37) . The prevailing current , the 
North Equatorial Current, generally flows 
from an east-northeast direction, split- 
ting into several branches and eddies . 
Velocity measurements during the fall of 
1975 and 1976 averaged 17 cm/s at the 
surface. The current decreases to zero 
at a depth of approximately 160 m and 
then reverses, flowing eastward at a ve- 
locity of 5.4 cm/s at 300-m depth. 

Data on bottom currents in study area C 
are not available, yet existing water 
mass characteristics and theoretical 
studies indicate a net eastward flow at 
low velocities (37). Measurements at the 
other two study areas indicate average 
velocities of 2.1 cm/s in DOMES Site A, 
and 5.2 cm/s in DOMES Site B. A mean 
westward movement was recorded ( 37 ) , but 
may be a result of the short duration of 
the measurement. 

Assumptions made, based on the previous 
discussion, are that surface and bottom 
currents would not significantly hinder 
mining operations, but that tropical 
storms would preclude mining from 30 to 
40 days each year. 



GEOLOGY 



GEOLOGICAL SETTING 

The area of interest falls within the 
Eastern Pacific Sedimentary Basin. Sea- 
mounts are in all parts of the basin, but 
are most prevalent near the east and 
west margins. Groups of sediment-covered 
abyssal hills ( 33 ) , characteristically 
elongated and parallel to one another, 
are the most dominant topographic fea- 
ture. Crest-to-crest distances are vari- 
able, but typically range from 5 to 10 km 
(36) . Local relief is generally low, but 
may reach 300 m. Slopes average 2° to 6° 
and generally do not exceed 15° except in 
areas of current scour or fault scarps 
(38) . Commonly , parallel scarps impart a 
stairstep effect on hillsides accompanied 
by sediment slumping and exposure of 
underlying basement rock. 



Water depths ranging from 3,600 to 
5,500 m increase to the north and west 
away from the Clipperton and Clarion 
Fault zones and the East Pacific Rise 
(spreading center). Accretion of basalt 
crust within the narrow spreading center 
and progressive outward movement results 
in a pattern of systematic aging in a 
westerly direction ( 39 ) . Crustal ages 
are mostly Oligocene in study area C, 
Paleocene in study area B, and Late Cre- 
taceous in study area A. 

In the northeast Pacific Ocean, distri- 
bution of sediments is strongly influ- 
enced by proximity to volcanic islands 
and other topographic highs , biological 
productivity of surface waters , and the 
increase of calcium carbonate solubility 
with depth (49) . 



Pelagic clays are dominant north of the 
Clarion fracture zone and in large irreg- 
ular areas south of it (fig. 2). These 
sediments are reddish-brown to chocolate 
colored, and are composed mainly of the 
clay minerals illite, smectite, and kao- 
linite. Because dissolution of fossil 
remains is nearly as rapid as deposition, 
organic remains are generally less than 
30 pet. This is attributable to a de- 
crease in biological activity away from 
the equator, and an increase in water 
depths. Sediment accumulation rates are 
very low, probably from 1 to 3 mm per 
1,000 yr (37). 

Between the Clipperton and Clarion 
fracture zones, siliceous ooze and sili- 
ceous clay are the most widespread sedi- 
ments. These are mostly clay minerals, 
but contain significant organic remains; 
in the case of ooze, at least 30 pet. 
Organic material is predominantly Quater- 
nary radiolaria, diatoms, sponge spic- 
ules, and silicof lagellates. Accumula- 
tion rates are believed to be from 3 to 
8 mm per 1,000 yr. 

Calcareous sediments cover tops of iso- 
lated seamounts and the seafloo'r in the 
southwest corner of the high-grade zone, 
but the most widespread occurrences are 
south of the Clipperton fracture zone. 
Coccoliths and foraminifera are the chief 
constituents; other materials include 
siliceous fossils, volcanic glass, and 
clay minerals. Accumulation rates are 
variable, ranging from 10 to more than 
100 mm per 1,000 yr depending on depths 
and surface activities (49) . 

Volcanic ash is the dominant sediment 
surrounding the Hawaiian Islands, over- 
lapping and burying siliceous ooze and 
clay northwest of study area A. Terrige- 
nous sediments, graded and ungraded, 
blanket the ocean floor adjacent to the 
North American Continent, but do not ex- 
tend beyond a few hundred kilometers. 
Sediment accumulation rates and thick- 
nesses in these environments are extreme- 
ly variable. In the three study areas, 
total sediment thicknesses are thought to 
average as follows, in meters: area A, 



250; area B, 200; and area C, 100. Wet 
bulk densities of sediments probably 
average from 1.2 to 1.3 g/cm 3 (37) . Sed- 
iments higher in biogenic debris are 
slightly less dense, because they con- 
tain more water. Vane shear strength, 
which is an indicator of load-bearing 
strength, is variable, but may average 
about 20 g/cm 2 at the sediment surface. 
This increases rapidly to 100 g/cm 2 at a 
depth of 15 cm. Below 15 cm, sediment 
strengths are believed to remain nearly 
constant (37) . 

DEPOSIT DESCRIPTION 

Nodule deposits occur mainly as irregu- 
lar, single-layer fields at the sediment- 
water interface (fig. 3). Additional 
nodules buried in sediment within a meter 
of the ocean floor surface compose an 
amount approximately equal to 25 pet of 
those on the surface. Few nodules occur 
below 1-m depth ( 39 ) . Within the high- 
grade zone, nodule sizes range from less 
than a millimeter (micronodules) to many 
centimeters in diameter. Nodule popula- 
tions range from to nearly 100 pet. 

Highest populations and grades are usu- 
ally associated with siliceous oozes 
and clays (19) . Sedimentation rates are 
very low, usually a few millimeters per 
1,000 yr; total sediment thickness is 
less than 300 m. 




''*-. 









fi <&+ 






"As** V«^ 



V 

v. 



Am 






rfi ***** &X&S& 



FIGURE 3. - Manganese nodule deposit in the 
northeast Pacific Ocean. Note irregular distri- 
bution and partial burial of nodules. 



Individual nodules are dull, earthy 
brown to lustrous blue black, with vari- 
able shapes. Characteristically, small 
nodules are spheroidal, and progressively 
larger nodules are ellipsoidal, and 
finally discoidal. Sorem and Fewkes ( 43 ) 
attribute this phenomenon to unequal 
growth. Bottom portions, nested in sedi- 
ment, accrete more rapidly than exposed 
tops. Irregular shapes, differing from 
the typical forms, are common. This 
characteristic is a result of natural ag- 
glomeration of smaller nodules, and the 
tendency of nodules to reflect the mor- 
phology of irregularly shaped nuclei. 

Surface textures range from smooth to 
granular, the apparent result of differ- 
ent growth patterns of constituent ox- 
ides. Porosity and internal surface area 
of individual nodules are high, about 
50 pet and 200 to 300 m 2 , respective- 
ly (35). As a result, most nodules con- 
tain about 30 wt pet sea water; wet spe- 
cific gravity ranges from 2.0 to 2.5 



MINERALOGY 

Ferromanganese nodules are typically 
composed of one or more nuclei surrounded 
by discontinuous layers of manganese and 
iron oxides. This imparts an onionpeel 
structure observed in cross section (31) . 
Clay layers occur at irregular intervals 
between the oxide phases, possibly sig- 
naling periods of nongrowth. Radial and 
concentric fracturing are nearly univer- 
sal in larger nodules (fig. 4). 

According to Sorem and Fewkes (43) , 
northeast Pacific nodules are composed 
mainly of dense top layers of amorphous 
iron oxides, whereas the bottom layers 
are generally intergrowths of the hydrous 
crystalline manganese oxides, todorokite 
and birnessite. Minor quantities of the 
mineral, 6-Mn0 2 also occur. Todorokite 
and birnessite are believed to contain 
the bulk of nickel and copper present in 
nodules. These two metals may be carried 
by lattice substitution, ion exchange, or 




FIGURE 4. - Manganese nodule polished cross section. The large clay-rich nucleus is sur- 
rounded by concentric layers of metal-rich oxides (light) and clay (dark). 

(Courtesy IF 1/ Plenum and Washington Slate Unii: entity.) 



adsorption ( 35 ) . The cobalt association 
is more obscure. However, recent work 
indicates that in high-cobalt nodules the 
element is preferentially enriched in 



manganese oxide phases. Conversely, in 
nodules with lower cobalt, iron oxides 
contain most of the element (21). 



RESOURCES 



DISCUSSION 



In this report, grades assigned to 
deposits are based on X-ray fluorescence 
spectrometry and atomic absorption analy- 
ses of nodules. Analytical data were ob- 
tained from many sources and have been 
carefully screened. As an example, as- 
says of specific nodule parts, such as 
nuclei, outer layers, etc., were dis- 
carded and only analyses of whole nodules 
or representative portions retained. 3 

Detailed studies of samples from DOMES 
Site C (11) show that the arithmetic mean 
of metal contents at individual sample 
sites can be predicted within ±10 pet, 
and at a 90-pct confidence level, with 
relatively few assays. For example, at 
76 pet of the sites sampled, means for 
nickel, copper, cobalt, manganese, iron, 
and zinc can be estimated from less than 
20 nodule analyses per site. If only 
nickel and copper are of interest, the 
mean can be predicted at 86 pet of the 
sample locations with analyses of just 
11 nodules per site. The study (11) also 
shows that variations in metal contents 
may be greater between nodules in the 
same sample than between sample averages 
from nearby, yet different locations. 
This phenomenon is probably the result of 
variations in metal content between dif- 
ferent size nodules. Comparisons of hun- 
dreds of analyses by Frazer (22) support 
the observations of Fewkes (11-13) , and 
indicate arithmetic means can be accu- 
rately predicted for sample stations in 
large areas of the high-grade zone with 
relatively few analyses. 

Nodule abundances (weight per unit 
area) and consequently resource quanti- 
ties calculated from them are more 

3 See Frazer (^2 ) , Fisk (J_4) , and Frazer 
and Fisk (20-21 ) for data, references, 
and discussion. See Fewkes (11-13) for 
additional information and discussion. 



difficult to determine. Despite the fact 
that nodule deposits cover very large 
areas of the seafloor, local nodule popu- 
lations are extremely variable. Over 
distances of a few meters, abundances may 
range from near to 10 or 15 kg/m 2 . 
Ideally, sampling is conducted on a grid 
basis, with bottom photography or tele- 
vision surveys between sample points. By 
necessity, however, estimates in this re- 
port are based on randomly located sam- 
ples and on series of photographs taken 
sequentially along linear track lines. 
This is because the original purpose of 
the work was research, rather than re- 
source evaluation. 

Factors relating to abundance and re- 
source estimates from seafloor photo- 
graphs and in situ sampling are discussed 
in appendix A. Because detailed site- 
specific data are unavailable to calcu- 
late photograph correction factors and 
because some sampling devices may lose 
portions of samples, estimates in this 
report are probably conservative, and are 
considered "minimum" values. Costing and 
system descriptions in succeeding sec- 
tions are based on these minimum values. 

GRADE AND ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES 

Based on available data, estimates of 
grades and abundances are made for depos- 
its in study areas A, B, and C. These 
three large areas are divided into sev- 
eral smaller ones (subareas) on the basis 
of station locations, nodule grades, and 
abundances. Rectangular boundaries are 
used for convenience and do not neces- 
sarily enclose or delimit any single 
deposit. In reality, an area large 
enough to support commercial mining may 
contain several distinct deposits. 

Assigned grades are simply the average 
of arithmetic means of samples at indi- 
vidual sites within subarea boundaries. 
Abundances are likewise averages of 



abundance estimates for individual sta- 
tions. Abundance estimates determined 
from actual samples were not differenti- 
ated from those derived from photographs , 
nor was any greater significance attached 
to them. 



regarded by some ( 18 ) to be a minimum 
requirement for a potential minesite. Of 
the remaining subareas only AIV appears 
to contain deposits grading well below 
the estimated requirement of 2.3 wt pet 
nickel plus copper. 



Station locations, average grades, and 
other information are illustrated in fig- 
ures 5 through 10 (figs. 5, 7, and 9 are 
in pocket at end of report). Figures 6, 
8, and 10 are enlargements of intensely 
sampled areas, which could not be proper- 
ly shown on a small-scale map. Numbers 
next to sample points are keyed to cor- 
responding index numbers in Appendix B, 
which is a series of tables containing 
index numbers, locations, population es- 
timates, abundance estimates, nodule 
assays, and statistical summaries. Indi- 
vidual tables are included for each sub- 
area within study areas A, B, and C. 
Data for samples outside subarea bound- 
aries are listed in separate tables. 

Table 1 is a summary of analytical data 
contained in Appendix B. Grades assigned 
to deposits in subareas All, AIII, Bill, 
CI, and CII average 2.3 wt pet or greater 
nickel plus copper. This figure is 



A summary of available abundance data 
and subarea size is contained in table 2. 
For convenience, abundances are given in 
both wet kilograms per square meter and 
dry metric tons per square kilometer. 
Subareas All, AIV, and CI appear to con- 
tain significantly high abundances, while 
AIII and Bill apparently contain medium 
abundances , and AV has low abundances . 
No estimates are available for the re- 
maining five subareas. 

Consideration of grade, abundance, and 
size (square kilometers) indicates three 
of the subareas (All, Bill, and CI) have 
the greatest economic potential, because 
deposits are high grade, and occur over 
large areas in sufficient abundance to 
support mining for a reasonable length of 
time (i.e., 20 yr) . The proposed mining 
and benef iciation systems and economic 
analyses address these three subareas 
only. 



TABLE 1 . - Summary of mean elemental 
contents, study areas A, B, and C, 
weight-percent 1 



Subarea 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 




1.20 


0.98 


0.21 


0.04 


24.2 


7.4 


All 


1.30 


1.00 


.21 


.05 


27.8 


7.1 


AIII... 


1.30 


1.19 


.22 


.05 


26.5 


7.3 


AIV 


.96 


.67 


.28 




20.2 


10.0 




1.41 


1.20 


.21 




26.2 


5.7 


AVI.... 


1.13 


1.10 


.17 


.04 


24.3 


6.9 




1.10 


.84 


.23 




22.0 


6.1 


BII 


1.18 


.92 


.23 


.06 


24.3 


6.3 


Bill... 


1.45 


1.24 


.25 


.07 


27.2 


5.2 




1.33 


1.04 


.26 


.07 


26.8 


6.9 


CII 


1.39 


.96 


.17 


.07 


27.7 


8.5 



L Dry-weight basis 



NOTE. —Blank 
available. 



indicates no information 



TABLE 2. - Average abundance and subarea 
size, study areas A, B, and C 



Subarea 



AI... 
All.. 
AIII. 
AIV.. 
AV... 
AVI.. 
BI.., 
BII., 
Bill, 
CI.., 
CII., 



Esti- 
mates 





12 

9 

16 

15 







74 

59 





Abundance 1 



Wet, 
kg/m 2 



NAp 
8.8 
6.2 
9.2 
3.4 
NAp 
NAp 
NAp 
5.3 
11.7 
NAp 



Dry, 
t/km 2 



NAp 

6,200 

4,300 

6,400 

2,400 

NAp 

NAp 

NAp 

3,700 

8,200 

NAp 



Subarea 

size , 

km 2 



43,700 
36,000 
17,000 
22,100 
24,100 
18,500 
12,500 
10,900 
64,600 
57,600 
35,800 



Not applicable; no estimates, 
nodules contain approximately 30 
wt pet free water. 



NAp 
L Wet 



10 



146.1° 



146.0" 



145.9' 



145.8' 



141-144 
150 <***» <»133 

1 49— ^^^^ 1 46- 1 48 

CXK K1 •145 



71-75? I 65 " 70 

• 57 



9.5° 



151-154 



173 



76-80 58-64 



,140 



9.4' 




J&157-160 Ojm<9. 
,172^ 131f3(fl29 128 



\ 



( **^ a 10810 
]j£ 109-112 



LEGEND 

O Ni plus Cu <L8 wt pet 
3 Ni plus Cu 1.8 - 2.3 wt pet 
• Ni plus Cu>2.3 wt pet 
Numbers next to symbols coincide 
with index numbers in Appendix B. 




5200 



9.3° 



9.2' 



10 

-I 



Scale, km 

Bathymetric contours in meters 
below mean sea level 



146.1° 146.0° 145.9° 145.8 

FIGURE 6. - Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in subarea All(a). 



11 



140.2° 



140.1' 



140.0° 



451,452 



495 



496,497 4gg 



444 



M87 
*y ^443484 

^ a'a 481 



454 



489 
498 
500 
445 446 50 1-^P\ 

448^ a •! SO 5 * *0 

AT a5o^ 



442 



441 
# A-485 
r\A— 482 
^V 440 
^50^488,490,491 

486 

492/^0) 439 



LEGEND 

^ No nodules observed or recovered 

As Nodules present, no assay 
O Ni plus Cu< 1.8 wt pet 

3 Ni plus Cu 1.8-2.3 wt pet 

• Ni plus Cu>2.3 wt pet 

Numbers next to symbols coincide 

with index numbers in Appendix B 
I 



10 



Scale, km 

Bathymetric contours in meters 

below mean sea level 



11.2 s 



11.1' 




11.0* 



10.9 C 



140.0° 140.1° 140.2° 

FIGURE 8. - Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in subarea Blll(a) 



12 



127.0° 



126.0° 



125.0° 




16.0° 



15.0° 



14.0 



126.0° 125.0° 

FIGURE 10. - Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in subarea CI. 



14.0° 



MINABLE RESOURCES 

Gross tonnage estimates for potential 
minesites can be very misleading. A 
series of practical considerations sig- 
nificantly lower the resource quantity 
that will actually be recovered. At any 
given site in the northeast Pacific there 
are fault scarps, basalt outcrops, exces- 
sive slope angles, and other seafloor 



features that reduce the usable portion 
of a deposit area to an estimated 75 pet 
of initial size ( 34 ) . Of the remaining 
area, the abundance of deposits in pos- 
sibly one-third of it is insufficient to 
warrant mining. This means that about 
half the original area has a minable re- 
source. Furthermore, not all minable re- 
source will be recovered because pickup 
efficiencies of presently envisioned mine 



13 



TABLE 3. - Estimated minable and recoverable resources, subareas 
All, Bill, and CI 



Average abundance dry t/km 2 . . 

Minable area 1 km 2 . . 

Minable resource million dry t.. 

Minable nodules traversed pet. . 

Pickup efficiency pet. . 

Mining efficiency 2 pet . . 

Recoverable resources ^ million dry t.. 



All 



6,200 

18,000 

111.6 

70 

85 

60 

67.0 



Bill 



3,700 

32,300 

119.5 

70 

80 

56 

66.9 



CI 



8,200 
28,800 

236.2 
70 
90 
63 

148.8 



*50 pet of total minesite area. 

2 Minable nodules traversed times pickup efficiency. 

3 Minable resource times mining efficiency. 



systems are expected to be no more than 
80 to 90 pet. Pickup efficiency will 
vary because of dissimilar abundances, 
and other physical factors. Also, maneu- 
vering and control limitations mean that 
only about 70 pet of the minable nodules 
will be traversed, thus mining efficiency 
will average about 60 pet. Considering 
all these factors, approximately 30 pet 
of the potential resource from a given 
deposit area will be recovered. This low 



percentage will probably increase with 
mining experience. 

Based on the above analysis, table 3 
contains estimates of both minable 
and recoverable resources for subareas 
All, Bill, and CI. These estimates serve 
as a resource base for the proposed 
mining-transportation-benef iciation sys- 
tems described in succeeding sections. 



MINING AND PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY 



DISCUSSION 

Major ocean mining consortia are in 
various stages of designing, building, 
and testing manganese nodule mining 
and processing systems. Presently, two 
mining-lift systems have been tested in 
both experimental facilities and at sea. 
The first, a continuous line bucket sys- 
tem consists of a 10-cm-diameter polypro- 
pylene line with drag buckets attached at 
regular intervals. A loop is played 
overboard and allowed to trail on the 
ocean floor. Traction devices on either 
one or two ships provide lateral movement 
as the loop is towed forward. Buckets 
remain attached as the rope moves through 
the friction drives and are emptied. The 
obvious advantage of this system is its 
simplicity. However, tests by the CNEXO 
(French) and Sumitomo consortia in the 
1970' s, were not successful, apparently 
because of tangling and low nodule recov- 
eries. Development of this system ap- 
pears to have been terminated. 



The second system is hydraulic and con- 
sists of a nodule collector unit attached 
to a mining ship by a steel pipeline. 
The pipe serves as both a towing means 
and a conduit for raising nodules. Lift 
is provided by either submersible hydrau- 
lic pumps or high-pressure air injected 
at a predetermined depth (air lift). 
Bubbles create upward movement in the 
pipe column as they rise and expand. 
One-fifth scale tests of hydraulic units 
were successfully conducted in 1978 by 
both the INCO and Deepsea Ventures con- 
sortia. Approximately 1,300 t of nodules 
were dredged from two sites in the north- 
east Pacific. Water depths were approxi- 
mately 4,500 and 5,000 m. 

A variety of processing schemes have 
been proposed for recovering value metals 
from nodules; the most promising have 
been tested in small pilot plants. Sig- 
nificant research has been directed 
towards development of four processes: 
(1) the Kennecott (Cuprion) process and 



14 



(2) the high-temperature sulfuric acid 
leach, both designed to recover primarily 
nickel, copper and cobalt; (3) the INCO 
process; and, (4) Deepsea Ventures pro- 
cesses, recovering manganese as well as 
nickel, copper, and cobalt. 

The Deepsea Ventures (Ocean Mining As- 
sociates) process is based on reaction of 
the manganese-iron hydroxide matrix with 
hydrochloric acid (HC1) to produce solu- 
ble iron and manganese chlorides, and 
thereby releasing metal values. Ferric 
chloride is removed by solvent extraction 
and oxidized to produce recyclable HC1 
and iron oxide. Copper, and then nickel, 
cobalt, and molybdenum are separated by 
liquid ion exchange (LIX) from the chlo- 
ride solution and electrowon in separate 
chloride circuits. Manganese metal is 
recovered by either fused salt electroly- 
sis or reduction with aluminum metal. 
Alternately, manganese oxide can be re- 
covered by high-temperature hydrolysis of 
MnCl 2 . 

The number and diversity of patents is- 
sued on the process suggests problems 
have been experienced (35) . One diffi- 
culty is the large consumption - of HC1 
(makeup requirement about 50 pet) during 
initial reduction and accompanying pro- 
duction of chlorine, which is not uti- 
lized in the remainder of the process. 
The gas must be marketed as a byproduct, 
exchanged with a polyvinyl monomer pro- 
ducer for excess hydrogen chloride, or 
reconverted to HC1. Although only minor 
problems occur in metal extraction and 
electrowinning from chloride solutions, 
Deepsea Ventures has not developed a 
satisfactory method to convert the man- 
ganese oxide intermediate product to a 
usable end product (f erromanganese) . 
According to Monhemius (35) , Metallurgie 
Hoboken-Overpelt , a new member of the 
consortium through its corporate ties 
with Union Miniere (Belgium) , recently 
developed system modifications that may 
resolve some of these problems. 

The INCO process is a combination of 
pyrometallurgical and hydrometallurgical 
methods that have been used in the 
processing of terrestrial ores. Stock- 
piled ore, containing about 30 pet water, 



is dried and then selectively reduced at 
1,400° C. Two phases are produced; a 
manganese-rich slag and an iron- 
nickel-copper-cobalt alloy. The alloy is 
oxidized to remove most iron and manga- 
nese; and next converted to a sulfide 
matte by the addition of pyrite, gypsum, 
and coke. It is then reoxidized (blown) 
to remove residual iron. Slags are re- 
turned to reduction and smelting fur- 
naces. The remaining matte is ground and 
pressure leached with sulfuric acid; 
metals are recovered by solvent extrac- 
tion, electrowinning, and precipitation. 
Ferromanganese, with acceptable manganese 
to phosphorous ratios, is produced from 
the manganese slag by reduction smelting 
with lime at 1,600° C. 

INCO's method has some distinct advan- 
tages. First, nearly all manganese and 
much of the iron is removed in a molten 
slag, which can be used to produce ferro- 
manganese. Second, other valuable com- 
modities are concentrated into an alloy 
phase, which weighs less than 10 pet of 
the original feed (35) . Treatment of 
this smaller quantity of material is 
relatively cheap compared with other 
processes and most of the commercial 
technology already exists (8). The prin- 
cipal disadvantage of this process is the 
high energy requirements for drying and 
smelting. 

The high-temperature sulfuric acid 
leach process, which has been investi- 
gated in European laboratories (_7) , is an 
adaptation of the technique used to re- 
cover nickel from laterites at Moa Bay, 
Cuba. Raw, wet nodules are ground, mixed 
with concentrated sulfuric acid, and 
heated to about 250° C. At this tempera- 
ture, most of the copper, nickel, and co- 
balt are dissolved, while little iron or 
manganese enter solution; thereby, sub- 
sequent purification steps are simpli- 
fied, and acid consumption is minimized. 
Value metals are recovered from the 
cooled leach effluent by essentially the 
same sequence of steps used in the hydro- 
metallurgical portion of the smelting 
process. 

Because of high temperatures and acid- 
ities in the leaching step, care must be 



15 



taken in selecting materials for con- 
struction. Another potential drawback to 
this process involves disposal of spent 
sulfate. Disposal of sulfate as gypsum, 
with recycling of ammonia within the pro- 
cess, generates large amounts of waste. 
An alternate approach involves the puri- 
fication of ammonium sulfate for sale as 
fertilizer. Less information has been 
published on this process than with the 
Deepsea Ventures, INCO, and Kennecott 
processes. 

In the Kennecott (Cuprion) process, wet 
ore is ground, and then slurried in a 
mixture of seawater and recycled process 
liquor which contains dissolved copper 
and ammoniacal ammonium carbonate. The 
slurry passes through a series of reac- 
tion vessels into which carbon monoxide 
is introduced. Cuprous ions are produced 
which subsequently catalyze the reduction 
of the manganese-iron oxide matrix (1) . 
Value metals dissolve and are separated 
from the reduced residues by countercur- 
rent washing. Ammonia and carbon dioxide 
are recovered and recycled by steam 
stripping residues. Electrowon copper 
and nickel are produced after having been 
extracted from the leach liquor using a 
mixture of LIX 64N 1 * in kerosine. Cobalt 
is recovered from the remaining solution 
(raffinite) by precipitation with H2S and 
subsequent reduction. Electrowinning is 
employed to recover nickel and copper as 
high-grade cathodes. 

Several favorable factors characterize 
this process: nearly all process steps 
are carried out at ambient temperature 
and pressure; energy consumption is rela- 
tively low; most reagents are relatively 
inexpensive or recyclable; and there is 
only limited use of corrosive and highly 
toxic reagents. Apparently, these char- 
acteristics were successfully demon- 
strated in a 350-kg/d pilot plant, which 
was operated for 43 days at Kennecott' s 
Ledgemont Laboratory ( 1_) . 

^Reference to specific products does 
not imply endorsement by the Bureau of 
Mines. 



While both the Cuprion and high- 
temperature sulfuric acid leach processes 
previously described are designed to 
recover primarily copper , nickel , and 
cobalt, it is possible that other metals 
such as molybdenum, would also be recov- 
ered. In this case, additional metals 
separation and purification steps would 
be required, but the process would not be 
greatly changed. Also, manganese could 
be recovered by a combination of physical 
and chemical steps. However, if manga- 
nese were to be recovered, materials 
handling and process design would be sig- 
nificantly altered and energy require- 
ments would increase considerably. 

OPERATIONAL INTEGRATION OF A PROPOSED 
RECOVERY SYSTEM 

Because description and costing of a 
nodule mine-transport-benef iciation sys- 
tem is very complex, only one system 
is described and applied to the three 
subareas, All, Bill, and CI (hereafter 
called ventures 1, 2, and 3). The system 
is modified for each subarea to reflect 
differences in transport distances, water 
depths, and nodule abundances. However, 
except to lower the projected mining rate 
for venture 2 which has comparatively low 
nodule abundance, no attempt has been 
made to optimize the many factors bearing 
on economic viability. Mining consortia 
and regulatory agencies involved would 
determine exact areas to be mined, their 
sizes, locations of facilities, methods 
employed, and production rates. 

The proposed system is, in part, hypo- 
thetical because there has been no com- 
mercial production experience, yet the 
descriptions and costs are drawn from 
many knowledgeable sources, both pub- 
lished and unpublished. Because both 
methods were successfully tested, the 
system plan includes hydraulic mining- 
lifting and Cuprion processing. Other 
benef iciation methods might be as feasi- 
ble, but little information is avail- 
able concerning process details and test 
results. Slurry transfer and transport 
of nodule ore is considered most likely, 






16 



because nodules are amenable to the meth- 
od, and much slurry handling experience 
exists in other areas of the minerals 
industry. 

Mining is scheduled on a 300-d/yr basis 
with an estimated annual production of 
3.0 million dry t for ventures 1 and 
3, and 2.4 million dry t for venture 2. 
Two ships recovering 5,000 dry t/d each 
(4,000 t for venture 2) would sweep the 
minesite in predetermined paths. Hy- 
draulic collectors, towed at an average 
velocity of 1.0 m/s (2 kn) , would dis- 
lodge, sort, and channel nodules to a 
large-diameter pipe, which would connect 
the collector to the ship (fig. 11). 
Submersible hydraulic pumps would main- 
tain an upward flow of water, nodules, 
and nodule fragments. Check-dump valves 
would protect the pumps , and prevent 
clogging in case of power failure. 

Aboard the mine ship, nodules would be 
screened, conveyed to storage holds, and 
dewatered by decantation. The ore would 
not be upgraded because chemical and 
physical characteristics of nodules do 
not lend themselves to traditional con- 
centration methods. Every few days, 
nodule ore would be reslurried and pumped 
through a flexible pipeline to large- 
capacity bulk transports where it would 
be again dewatered and then transported 
to an unloading terminal on the west 
coast of the United States. 

At the unloading facility, ore would be 
reslurried and pumped to nodule storage 
ponds on shore. From there the slurry 
would be transferred inland, by slurry 
pipeline, to storage ponds at the pro- 
cessing plant. 

The processing plant would operate 
24 h/d, 330 d/yr at 100 pet capacity. 
Nickel and copper would be recovered as 
high-purity cathodes, and cobalt would be 
chemically precipitated, purified, and 
recovered as metallic or oxide powder. 
An add-on option is included to recover 
manganese by treating about one-half the 
Cuprion tailing and upgrading it to a 
f erromanganese product. 



Tailings from both Cuprion and ferro- 
manganese plants would be treated to ad- 
just pH and then pumped to tailings ponds 
of conventional design. Slag from the 
f erromanganese plant would be stored in 
an adjacent area. 

MINING 

Nodule mining in each deep ocean site 
would be conducted 300 d/yr at a rate 
of 8,000 dry t/d (11,430 t/d as mined, 
wet) for venture 2 and 10,000 dry t/d 
(14,300 t/d as mined, wet) for the other 
two ventures. Operations would be con- 
ducted around the clock, but actual pro- 
duction time is estimated at 20 h/d. 
Hourly rates would therefore be 400 and 
500 dry t, respectively. Major equipment 
modifications, ship repairs, and drydock 
would likely take place during July 
through August, when from three to four 
major storms normally occur. A high- 
speed boat, operating from a major port, 
would transport personnel and supplies 
to the minesite. Ship-to-ship transfer 
would be by helicopter. 



Prior to actual mining, extensive char- 
acterization of a portion of the previ- 
ously explored minesite would be com- 
pleted. A large-scale bathymetric map 
would be constructed; locations of bottom 
obstructions, including cliffs, faults, 
and rock outcrops would be clearly 
marked. Sediment bearing strengths and 
other factors of local marine environment 
would be analyzed in detail. Based on 
this additional resource information, a 
mining plan would be drawn up at least a 
year in advance of each year of mining. 
The survey program would continue 
throughout the life of the operation, re- 
quiring the use of a survey vessel most 
of the time. 

The mining system would be composed of 
two mine ships, each capable of conduct- 
ing operations independent of the other. 
Each ship would be in the 100,000-dwt 
class; approximately 250 m long, with a 
45-m beam and a draft of about 12.2 m. 
About 30,000 shaft hp would be required 
for propulsion, mining, ore transfer, and 



17 



NODULE TRANSPORT 



MINE SHIP 



Screening 
and separating 
equipment 



Support platform 
and derrick 




Bow 
thrusters 



KEY 

A Pipe joint 

B Lift pipe (steel alloy) 

C Vortex suppressor(s) 

D Check-dump valve 

E Hose-pipe connector 

F Power and communications cable 

G Flexible hose 



COLLECTOR 

FIGURE 11. - Hydraulic deep ocean mining system. Modified from Flipse (15-16) and Grote (24). 



18 



crew accommodations (_5_) . The large ship 
size is in part dictated by the need to 
have several days storage capacity, to 
significantly reduce the number of 
transports. 

A ship of conventional hull form, simi- 
lar to an ore carrier, would be used but 
would require many changes and additions 
to be able to serve as a mine ship. The 
most conspicuous addition, the pipe han- 
dling system, would consist of a derrick, 
support platform, pipe racks, and combi- 
nation crane-elevator used to move pipe 
from storage. The derrick and platform 
would be built over a rectangular hole 
(moon pool) cut through the hull of the 
ship. The moon pool would be amidships 
where there is the least pitch and roll. 
Assuming pipe support at the main 
strength deck, a 20- by 20-m moon pool 
should be sufficient to keep the pipe 
from striking the walls during a 30° 
roll ( 17 ) , the design maximum. The sup- 
port platform-work floor, capable of 
holding an estimated 5,000 t, would be 
mounted on a two-axle gimbal, which al- 
lows the trailing pipestring to remain 
near vertical as the ship pitches and 
rolls. A hydraulic support system would 
compensate for heave. 

Other onboard equipment would consist 
of separator and settling tanks, screens, 
and conveyors to separate nodules from 
sediments and other waste. Slurry pumps 
and permanent piping would be installed 
to route nodules to storage and sediments 
overboard; possibly through a flexible 
pipe extending to a maximum depth of 
200 m (16) . Special care would be taken 
to retain nodule "fines," which carry 
most metal values. Additional tanks and 
pumps would be used to reslurry the ore 
and transfer it to bulk transport ves- 
sels. Total mine ship storage would be 
70,000 wet t (49,000 dry t) , equivalent 
to the capacity of the ore transports 
plus 10 pet margin. 

To tow the collector at required low 
velocities and to accurately maneuver, 
the mine ship would have to be fitted 
with a sophisticated computer-controlled 
propulsion system. This would include 



bow and stern thrusters as well as a 
sonar locator system. The locator system 
would consist of hull-mounted transducers 
that generate sound pulses. The pulses 
would be picked up and returned by a set 
of transponders positioned on the sea- 
floor. The returned signals would be 
analyzed by a computer, which would 
steer the ship within a few feet of 
the prescribed course ( 50 ) and around 
obstacles. 

A crew (mining and operational) of 
about 72 (17) would require living and 
recreational facilities. Because of ex- 
tended tours of duty, these facilities 
might include amenities such as individ- 
ual quarters, a gymnasium, theater, and 
gameroom. Two crews for each ship would 
be required to permit a 30-day-on, 30- 
day-off work cycle typical of the off- 
shore oil industry. 

Most of the pipeline would be similar 
in composition to oil-drill pipe. Inside 
diameter would be constant at about 
40 cm, while wall thickness would vary 
from 1.5 to 8.5 cm. Pipe section lengths 
from 12 to 13 m are anticipated. Sec- 
tions would be joined by clamp or thread- 
ed (tool) joints. An electrical cable 
would be attached to the pipe to supply 
power to the submersible pumps and to the 
nodule collector. Depending on opera- 
tional experience, fairings or other 
types of devices might be attached to 
reduce drag and minimize vibration of the 
string (24) . 

Near the lower end of the pipestring, a 
strong, flexible hose would connect the 
collector and steel pipe. This would 
allow for undulations in topography. 
Total length of the pipe string would be 
about 15 pet greater than the depth of 
the area being mined. 

Residual sediment and biogenic debris, 
water, and nodules would be moved up the 
pipeline using a multistage hydraulic 
pump system. Three pumps would be 
mounted along the string: one within a 
few hundred feet of the surface and the 
other two about one-third and two-thirds 
of the water depth. An "off-line" design 



19 



would be preferable because it would uti- 
lize a motor-pump design that eliminates 
the need for solids to pass through the 
impellers. Consequently, there would be 
less nodule-caused abrasion, pump wear, 
or chance of damage in case of power 
failure (17, 44). 



until the proper pipe string length had 
been achieved. Assuming 15 min per sec- 
tion, 4 to 5 days would be required to 
complete the job. The final pipe section 
would be connected to the separator and 
ore handling equipment , and mining would 
proceed as planned. 



The last major component of the mining 
system would be a skid-mounted collector 
having the simplest design possible until 
mining experience dictates otherwise. 
Front-mounted tines, cutter bar, or simi- 
lar devices would dislodge nodules en- 
countered by the collector and reject 
oversize material. Electric or hydraulic 
motor-powered conveyors would move ad- 
mitted nodules , nodule fragments , and 
sediment through a series of screens to 
the hose or dredge pipe opening where 
hydraulic flow would move them up the 
pipeline. During the screening process 
most of the sediment would be removed. 

Production demands would require a 
large collector, as much as 20 m in 
width, depending on average deposit abun- 
dance. The device would be strongly 
built to withstand inevitable collisions 
with undetected obstacles, and gross 
weights would probably range from 10 to 
30 t. 

Actual mining would begin by preparing 
the collector and attaching it to the 
flexible hose. Depending on size, the 
unit would be either lowered over the 
side and keelhauled beneath the moon pool 
or lowered directly through it. Steel 
pipe with attached fairings and power 
cable would be added section by section 



The collector would be towed at a 
velocity of approximately 1 m/s (2 kn) , 
resulting in a pipeline trailing angle of 
about 7° from vertical ( 15 ) . The veloc- 
ity could not be increased appreciably 
because a 50-pct increase in speed nearly 
doubles the power requirements and flat- 
tens the trailing angle to approximately 
14° or more. The large trailing angle 
increases pumping requirements and pipe 
abrasion. According to Flipse ( 15) , a 
flow velocity of about 4.9 m/s is suffi- 
cient to lift nodules through a pipe 7° 
from vertical. A solids to fluid ratio 
of about 1:7 (14 vol pet) can be expected 
( 17) . Shaw ( 41 ) estimates that service 
life of a pipeline and collector would 
be about 12 and 6 months, respectively. 
Others expect twice this life ( 17 ) . 

Physical characteristics affecting min- 
ability of the potential minesites are 
summarized in table 4. Grade in each 
subarea is high and the resources appear 
sufficient to support mining at the 
specified rates for 20 yr or more. Vari- 
able water depths require different pipe 
string lengths but no significant changes 
in shipboard equipment design. Signifi- 
cant differences in collector sizes , how- 
ever, are dictated by the wide range 
of nodule abundances . In fact , the low 
nodule abundance of venture 2 subarea 



TABLE 4. - Deposit characteristics affecting minability, 
ventures 1, 2, and 3 








1— All 


2— Bill 


3--CI 


Depth 




5,200 
6,200 

1.30 
1.00 
0.21 
0.05 
27.8 
67.0 


4,800 
3,700 

1.45 
1.24 
0.25 
0.07 
27.2 
66.9 


4,600 


Average metal content, 
Ni 


wt pet (dry basis): 


8,200 
1.33 


Cu 


1.04 


Co 


0.26 


Mo 


0.07 


Mn 


26.8 


Recoverable resource.. 




148.8 



20 



would require a very large dredge to 
maintain a reasonable, yet smaller pro- 
duction level than ventures 1 and 3. 
Increased size and weight of the larger 
collector would require a stronger and, 
very likely, heavier pipe resulting in 
increased loads on the gimballed support 
platform. Mine ship fuel consumption 
would increase, but pumping requirements 
would not, because the mining rate would 
not increase. Design of collectors for 
each minesite would vary in some aspects, 
depending on sediment type and bearing 
strengths, and minesite topography. How- 
ever, no significant cost differences are 
anticipated based on design. 

Table 5 summarizes mining parameters 
for the three ventures. Assuming 20-h 
days, annual production at about 95 pet 
capacity would be 3.0 million dry t for 
ventures 1 and 3, and 2.4 million dry t 
for venture 2. 

TABLE 5. - Mining parameters for 
ventures 1, 2, and 3 



Dredge width m. . 

Nodules traversed 1 . .dry t/h.. 

Dredge efficiency pet.. 

Nodules rec o v erd. . . .dry t/h. . 



1 



14 
312 

85 
265 



19 
253 

80 
203 



10 
295 

90 
266 



1 Based on collector velocity of 1 m/s. 

TRANSPORTATION 

Relatively large 70,000-dwt bulk ore 
carriers or similar vessels are best 
suited to transport nodule ore because an 
economy of scale exists, and because they 
are probably the largest ships that can 
navigate most west coast port waters 
(^0. 5 A modified hull design, intermedi- 
ate between conventional and shallow 
draft types, could carry the relatively 

^Domestic ocean mining legislation 
(Public Law 96-283, Deep Seabed Hard Min- 
eral Resources Act) requires processing 
in the United States. Alternate sites 
would be on the island of Hawaii and 
along the gulf coast. 



dense ore, while maintaining a reasonably 
shallow draft. Extra steel would be used 
to compartmentalize holds and give added 
strength ( 4_) . 

Nonstructural modifications required 
for nodule transport vessels include 
piping; pumps and conveyors to receive, 
distribute, decant, and dewater nodule 
slurry; a boom to pick up and lift slurry 
and fuel lines aboard; and dedicated 
stowage tanks and piping for mine-ship 
fuel. 

Table 6 lists dimensions and other 
characteristics of the proposed nodule 
transports. For economy, the vessels are 
assumed to be foreign built (European) 
and diesel powered. A relatively small 
crew of 32 would be adequate, because the 
ships would not be equipped to reslurry 
and unload their cargo. Capital costs 
would be less for one set of slurrying 
equipment at dockside, as opposed to mul- 
tiple installations on transports. Also, 
onshore maintenance would be easier and 
cheaper. Shipboard slurrying equipment 
could be added later if, for instance, 
ocean dumping of tailings were to be 
initiated. At 90 pet of the nominal 
capacity of 70,000 long tons, each vessel 
would carry 64,000 t of dewatered slurry 
(4^) containing the equivalent of 44,800 t 
of dry nodule material. 

TABLE 6. - Characteristics of proposed 
70,000-dwt nodule transports (4_) 

Dimensions, m: 

Length 226.0 

Beam 36.9 

Depth 18.6 

Draft m.. 12.5 

Horsepower 18 ,700 

Speed, kn: 

Laden 14.5 

Unladen (40 pet ballast) 16.7 

Fuel consumption, bbl/d: 

At sea 490 

In port 49 

Lubricating oil bbl/d.. 2.8 



21 



Transport operations between the mine- 
site and west coast would coincide with 
the 300-d mine ship schedule. A typi- 
cal transport cycle would consist of the 
following four phases: 

• Ship-to-ship transfer of slurry, 
fuel, and supplies. 

• Transportation of slurry to an un- 
loading facility. 

• Unloading slurry, loading fuel and 
supplies. 

• Returning to mines ite under ballast. 

Slurry transfer would be initiated by 
passing a towline and large-diameter, 
flexible pipe to the carrier. Once at- 
tached, the lines would be played out 
approximately 200 m (15) . The mine ship 
would then tow the transport during pump- 
ing operations. This would insure a 
constant, safe distance and prevent ex- 
cessive strain on the slurry line. 

Normally ship-to-ship slurry pumping 
would be conducted simultaneously with 
transfer of supplies and fuel. Most sup- 
plies would be transferred by helicopter, 
but heavy equipment would require use of 
a mine-ship crane. Fuel would be pumped 
through a flexible line stored on the 
mine ship. 

On the mine ship, high-pressure water 
jets would be sequentially directed into 
holds containing dewatered nodule ore. 
Centrifugal pumps would feed the result- 
ing slurry through piping to a manifold 
on the main deck level; the slurry would 
then be routed to the main transfer line. 
The pumped slurry would consist of a max- 
imum of 40 pet solids and have a specific 
gravity of 1.6 or less (_5, 8). Rated 
capacity of individual pumps would be 
500 t of solids per hour. Complete 
transfer would probably take 30 to 32 h, 
including 4 h for passing lines, connect- 
ing, playing out, and disconnecting (4). 

Based on an average speed of 15.6 kn, 
steaming time to and from port would take 
an estimated 14.2, 11.5, and 9.8 days, 



respectively, for venture 1, 2, and 3 

transports. Minor variations would be 

expected because of weather and sea 
conditions. 

Unloading at an onshore slurry termi- 
nal, with a design pumping capacity 
greater than that of the mine ship, 
would require less actual pumping time 
than ship-to-ship transfer. However, as 
slurry carriers approach the facility it 
might be necessary to slow or wait for 
high tide to traverse access channels. 
Considering this and other delays in 
loading supplies and fuel, total in-port 
time would be 2 to 3 days. 

Table 7 gives a summary of pertinent 
ore transportation information. The num- 
ber of vessels required to meet the an- 
nual production goals of 2.4 and 3.0 mil- 
lion dry t, would depend on the number of 
trips each vessel would make per year and 
the capacity of each ship (44,800 dry t). 
In turn, the number of annual trips is 
the quotient of 300 operating days divid- 
ed by the estimated round trip (cycle) 
time. Cycle time is simply the sum of 
loading, unloading, and steaming times. 

TABLE 7. - Summary of transportation 
data, ventures 1, 2, and 3 



Distance to port 

^nmi. . 
Transport cycle 

t ime d . . 

Annual trips per 

vessel 

Vessels required 



1 



2,660 

18 

17 
4 



2,160 

16 

19 
3 



1,840 

13 

23 
3 



^nmi is equal to 1.85 km. 

SLURRY TERMINAL 

An onshore slurry terminal, similar to 
that described by Dames and Moore (8) , is 
illustrated in figure 12. The facility, 
as designed, would occupy about the 
smallest practical land surface area and 
would receive, store, and pump nodule 
slurry to the process plant; it would not 
receive or load tailings for disposal at 
sea. A significantly larger installa- 
tion would be required for that purpose, 



22 



Nodule transport 




Slurry line to 
process plant 



50 

_i_ 



-L 



100 



FIGURE 12. 

Moore (8). 



Scale, m 

Plan view of slurry receiving terminal and pumping station. Modified from Dames & 



because of the large volume of waste pro- 
duced by processing. Major components of 
the unloading facility would include a 
dock; mooring dolphins; 20-ton-capacity 
cranes to service transport vessel stor- 
age holds; a portable slurry pump for 
each hold; an access trestle; water and 
slurry piping, water tanks, raw nodule 
storage ponds; a pump building; and stor- 
age, shop, and office buildings. 



Transport vessels from ventures 1 and 3 
would arrive once every 4 to 4.5 days; 
vessels from venture 2 would arrive about 
once every 5 days. If loaded drafts were 
near channel depth limits, vessels would 
wait, then proceed to the terminal at 
high tide. Upon docking, hatch covers 
would be opened and, using dockside 
cranes, the portable slurry units would 
be suspended in each hold. High-pressure 



23 



waterlines, fed by onsite storage tanks 
and pumps, would be attached to slurrying 
nozzles. Outlets on each unit would be 
connected to a collector system leading 
to the slurry pump building and storage 
ponds. During unloading operations units 
would be lowered into the dewatered ore 
as special sinking jets slurried material 
directly below the units. Side-mounted 
jets would undercut and slurry surround- 
ing ore as a hydraulic driving mechanism 
slowly rotated the unit. Most material 
would be routed to the storage ponds. 
However, a portion would probably be 
sent directly to the pump building, and 
then through a pipeline to the process- 
ing plant. Slurry storage capacity on 
the 10-ha site would be approximately 
110,000 m 3 , sufficient for two to three 
transport loads. Water requirements for 
reslurrying the ore would be substantial; 
however, most would be recycled from the 
process plant. Makeup water would be 
pumped directly from the harbor with 
no requirement for purification or other 
treatment. 

Supplies for the mine ships and indi- 
vidual transports would be delivered to 
the dock by truck and lifted aboard by 
crane. A freshwater line would supply 
water when required. Diesel bunkering 
could be accomplished by barge, making 
fuel storage and pumping facilities un- 
necessary. Tanks and storage, however, 
are included in facility costs in the 
"Capital and Operating Costs" section. 

The processing plant would probably be 
a significant distance inland because of 
limited availability of suitable land 
near developed ports. Two pipes would be 
laid side by side the entire distance. A 
larger pipe would carry nodule slurry to 
the plant, while a smaller one would re- 
turn decanted water to the terminal. As- 
suming a maximum distance of 40 km and 
relatively flat terrain, a bank of cen- 
trifugal pumps with two booster stations 
would supply sufficient pumping capacity. 
Storage ponds at the terminal would allow 
minor pipeline repairs during the oper- 
ating year; major replacements could be 
made in the off-season. The slurry line 



would be sized to transport nodules at 
essentially the same rate as received: 
approximately 425 and 340 t/h dry solids 
for the 3.0 and 2.4 million t/yr opera- 
tions, respectively. A 25-cm-ID pipe 
would be required for the former opera- 
tions and a 20-cm-ID pipe for the latter. 
Slurry densities would be somewhat lower 
than for other transport operations, 
around 30 pet solids, to allow for easy 
resuspension in the event of pump fail- 
ure. If desirable, nodule ore could be 
ground at the terminal; this would reduce 
flow velocity and pipe diameter require- 
ments. Operational downtime would be 
about 10 pet. Land usage would be about 
1.0 ha for the two pumping stations and 
58 ha for the pipeline. Power would be 
purchased from a local supplier. 

CUPRION PROCESSING 

The 3 million dry t processing plant 
would require approximately 90 ha of 
land. Requirements for the smaller 2.4 
million dry t plant would not be much 
less. Both Cuprion plants would use sig- 
nificant amounts of water, which is as- 
sumed to be available from nearby 
sources. Maximum reuse of water would be 
practiced in the plant, and generation of 
electricity in the plant's utilities sec- 
tion would meet most power requirements. 
Coal would be the cheapest fuel and 
source of carbon monoxide reducing gas. 
A well-developed local infrastructure is 
assumed to exist nearby to support plant 
operations, including a pool of skilled 
labor, and other community services such 
as schools, hospitals, and fire protec- 
tion. Provision is made for construction 
of 8.0 km of paved highway and rail spur 
line. 

An assumption is made that waste will 
be stored a significant distance from 
processing facilities because of continu- 
ing environmental concern over waste 
disposal. Costs are based on a plant- 
to-storage distance of 100 km. Approxi- 
mately 480 and 600 ha of land would be 
needed at the disposal site for a 20-yr 
operation for the smaller and and larger 
plants, respectively. 



24 



During normal operations, slurried ore 
would be received from the pipeline and 
be routed to storage ponds to await 
processing. Ponds, 5 m deep covering 
12 ha, would be sufficient for 3.0 to 
3.5 months' storage, a requirement dic- 
tated by the inability to mine nod- 
ules all year round. The equivalent of 
9,090 dry t/d for ventures 1 and 3 or 
7,270 dry t/d for venture 2 would be pro- 
cessed 330 d/y. Slurry would be re- 
claimed from storage and transferred to a 
surge tank in the ore preparation sec- 
tion, mixed with recycled ammonia-rich 
liquor from the reduction and leach-wash 
sections (fig. 13), and then fed to hy- 
drocyclones for classification. Under- 
flow would be fed to ball mills where 
particles would be reduced in size and 
sent back to the surge tank. Minus 100- 
mesh overflow, containing less than 5 pet 
solids ( 35 ) , would report directly to the 
reduction section. 

Ninety-eight percent of the manganese 
oxide matrix would be reduced in a cas- 
cade series of reaction vessels by the 
action of carbon monoxide catalyzed by 
internally generated cuprous ions. 

The net effect would be to reduce man- 
ganese to the divalent state and produce 
manganese carbonate; as a result, metal- 
lic commodities to be recovered would be 
liberated. The required concentration of 
cuprous ions would be maintained by con- 
tinually sparging a carbon monoxide-rich 
gas into reaction vessels. Synthesis gas 
generated from gasified coal contains a 
significant amount of H 2 and acid gases 
(CO2, H2S) , which would be separated from 
carbon monoxide prior to its use in 
reduction (7). 



Dilute slurry would be passed to a clari- 
fier, whose overflow would be treated 
with ammonia and carbon dioxide, cooled, 
and returned to leach reactors. Thick- 
ened underflow would be combined with 
second stage wash liquor and oxidized 
with air to convert cuprous copper to the 
cupric state to facilitate metal extrac- 
tion by liquid ion exchange (LIX) . Also, 
cobalt and iron would be oxidized; iron 
would precipite as an insoluble hydroxide 
(8). Offgases would be vented to ammonia 
recovery. 

Oxidized slurry would be pumped to a 
countercurrent decantation (CCD) system 
where metals would be further solubi- 
lized, and where primary liquid-solid 
separation and washing would be made. 
Nickel and copper recovery would be 
greater than 90 pet (1_) , and cobalt re- 
covery about 65 pet. 

Manganese-rich tailings and process gas 
would be sent to ammonia recovery, and 
pregnant liquor to the LIX section for 
metal separation. There, nickel and cop- 
per would be coextracted, then selec- 
tively stripped (Kennecott researchers 
determined that coextraction of the two 
metals greatly simplified the process). 
Extraction would be carried out at 40° C 
in a series of three mixer-settler tanks 
using 40 pet LIX 64N in kerosine. Recov- 
ery of nickel and copper would be greater 
than 99.9 pet, but about 5 pet of the 
ammonia would also be extracted (2^) and, 
if not removed, would accumulate in the 
nickel electrolyte. Two wash sections 
would reduce it to an acceptable concen- 
tration and the recovered ammonia would 
be recycled to the plant ammonia recovery 
section. 



The critical reactions were demon- 
strated at ambient pressure and 50° C, 
but a holdup time of about 20 min for 
each of the five vessels would be re- 
quired ( 1_) . Autoclaves, maintained at a 
pressure of about 5 kg/cm 2 and 50° C may 
be utilized, thereby improving reaction 
rates and reducing the size of reactor 
vessels (^35 ) . Exothermic heat of reac- 
tion would be removed in heat exchangers 
and excess gas sent to ammonia recovery. 



A small amount of cobalt would be ex- 
tracted with nickel and copper and would 
have to be removed to prevent excess 
buildup. To accomplish this, hydrogen 
sulfide would be introduced into a sol- 
vent purge stream (8). The resulting 
precipitate would be filtered, washed, 
and passed to cobalt recovery. 

Nickel would be selectively stripped 
from the organic liquor by contact with 



25 




26 



acidic return electrolyte from nickel 
electrowinning. Composition of the elec- 
trolyte would be controlled to maintain 
the required selectivity for nickel; ad- 
vance electrolyte, reporting to elec- 
trowinning, would contain approximately 
75-g/L nickel at a pH of 3.0 and a 
nickel-copper ratio of 25,000:1. Strip- 
ping would take place in three stages of 
mixer-settlers of conventional design. 

Organic feed passing to copper strip- 
ping would contain copper and nickel in a 
ratio of about 70:1. Both metals would 
be stripped, in two stages, using a more 
acidic return electrolyte from copper 
electrowinning. Nickel content of the 
electrolyte does not affect copper elec- 
trowinning if concentrations are below 
20 g/L. This would be accomplished by 
bleeding copper stripping tanks. Bleed 
solution would be passed through a series 
of cells, where copper would be electro- 
won to depletion, and the remaining elec- 
trolyte passed to vacuum evaporators, 
where water would be removed and nickel 
sulfate precipitated. The sulfate would 
be sent to cobalt recovery and the re- 
maining, strongly acidic solution re- 
turned to process, where it would' be uti- 
lized to redissolve scrap copper (8). 

Nickel would be electrowon from the ad- 
vance electrolyte in conventional cells. 
Cathode bags would be used as blanks for 
starter sheets, and boric acid and sodium 
sulfate would be added to regulate pH and 
conductivity. Starter sheets would be 
cleaned in sulfuric acid prior to use. 
Nickel scrap would be recovered by dis- 
solution in ammonia-rich raffinite and 
routing to stripping (J3) . 

Copper would also be recovered using 
conventional electrowinning technology. 
Starter sheets would be deposited on ti- 
tanium blanks in the stripping section 
and then installed in commercial cells. 
Most of the spent electrolyte would be 
recycled to stripping, and the remainder 
purged of nickel in the manner described 
above. Full-sized nickel and copper 
cathodes are to be the final products. 
Both commodities would be removed from 



cells , washed , and prepared 
to market. 



for shipment 



im 

I- 



Apparently, recovery of cobalt from the 
nickel-copper poor LIX raffinite has not 
been fully tested at pilot-plant scale. 
However, several plausible schemes exist. 
One method, outlined in the Dames and 
Moore (8) report is described here. Un- 
extracted nickel, copper, cobalt, and 
zinc are precipitated with ammonium hy- 
drosulfide, produced by sparging hydrogen 
sulfide into ammonia solution. Precipi- 
tate and solution are separated in a 
clarifier; overflow reports to ammonia 
recovery and underflow is sent to steam 
stripping for removal of ammonia. Sul 
fide slurry is mixed with purges from 
electrowinning, and pressure leached with 
air to preferentially dissolve and remove 
cobalt and nickel. Copper and zinc sul- 
fide precipitates are separated, washed, 
and sold to smelters as concentrates. 

Following pH adjustment, the nickel- 
cobalt sulfate solution passes to a 
heated autoclave where hydrogen gas is 
sparged into the vessel, thereby reducing 
the nickel. Ammonia is added to neutral- 
ize the sulfuric acid being formed. The 
process is completed in a series of cy- 
cles , with care being taken to prevent 
overreduction resulting in coprecipita- 
tion of cobalt. Once adequate density is 
obtained, the nickel powder is removed, 
washed, dried, and briquet ted for sale. 

The remaining sulfate solution passes 
to an evaporator where cobalt and small 
amounts of nickel and ammonium sulfates 
are precipitated. Nickel and cobalt 
salts are redissolved in strong ammonia 
solution and cobalt is reoxidized with 
air to the cobaltic state. Cobalt then 
remains in solution as the stream is 
acidified; nickel salts are precipitated 
and recycled to the pH adjustment step. 
Nickel-free solution is heated and re- 
duced with hydrogen in an autoclave and 
enough ammonia is added to neutralize any 
acid formed. Cobalt metal is removed, 
washed, dried, and briquetted for sale as 
cobalt powder. 



Sulfate purge from cobalt recovery is 
combined with additional ammonium sulfate 
from the LIX section, reacted with slaked 
lime, and stripped of ammonia by intro- 
duction of steam. Gypsum formed in this 
process is combined with other solid and 
liquid wastes and plant runoff. The 
material is treated as required and 
pumped to waste impoundment. Gypsum and 
other wastes may be combined with part 
or all of the manganese tailing depending 
on whether manganese is recovered for 
sale. 

Manganese carbonate tailings from the 
CCD wash report to ammonia recovery where 
they are heated and stripped of ammonia 
and carbon dioxide by countercurrent con- 
tact with steam. Gases are combined with 
vapors from other ammonia stripping oper- 
ations and are cooled and condensed. 
Scrubbed gases from process vents are 
also added and the solution recycled to 
CCD wash. Carbon dioxide makeup is ob- 
tained from boiler flues and ammonia-free 
gases from process vents are sent to the 
main stack. 

Concentrated ammonia solution, needed 
for reduction of the raw nodule slurry, 
is obtained by partially stripping raf- 
finite from cobalt recovery; the result- 
ing ammonia-rich vapors are combined with 
vapors from LIX, reduction, oxidation, 
and lime boil steps as well as makeup am- 
monia. The gas is condensed and recycled 
to nodule reduction. 

Table 8 lists material, water, and pow- 
er requirements of a 3 million dry t/yr 



27 



Cuprion plant. The table also shows 
wastes produced, but it does not consider 
additional requirements for ferroman- 
ganese production. Quantities for a 
2.4 million t/yr operation would be ap- 
proximately 80 pet of these values. 

MANGANESE RECOVERY 6 

A schematic description of an optional 
onsite facility to further treat part 
of the manganese carbonate residue 
(4,250 t/d) is presented in figure 14. 
Not all tailing is processed, because of 
presumed market limitations. Plant de- 
sign, capacity, and fixed capital costs 
for all three ventures are assumed iden- 
tical. Carbonate tailing from ammonia 
recovery would be pumped to the benefici- 
ation section where it would be washed 
and centrifuged. Thickened pulp would be 
mixed with fresh water, soda ash, caustic 
soda, and sodium silicate prior to flota- 
tion with saponified fatty acids. As 
much as 60 pet of the manganese carbonate 
could be recovered in the froth as a con- 
centrate assaying 35 to 40 pet manganese. 
After thickening to about 50 pet solids, 
the material would be dried and calcined 
in a rotary kiln to make synthetic man- 
ganese oxide assaying between 55 and 
60 pet manganese. 

When cooled, calcine would be conveyed 
to a surge pile or directly to one of 

°G. D. Gale, metallurgist, Western Field 
Operations Center, provided design and 
cost information for recovery of 
f erromanganese. 



TABLE 8. - Cuprion ammonia leach plant, major inputs and wastes^ 



690 
8.5 
434 



Coal thousand t . . 

.Water million m 3 . . 

Power 2 million kW*h. . 

Materials and 

supplies 3 thou sand t.. 270 

^Quantities are adjusted from reference 8. 
2 Gross requirements, mostly generated internally. 
3 All supplies including liquids and gases. 



Tailings million t . . 

Liquids million m 3 . . 

Gases thousand m 3 /min . . 

Manufacturing thousand t . . 



3.3 

4.5 

10.3 

125 



28 



Cuprion plant tailing 
Sump and pump 
Centrifuge 



Pulp 



Reagents 



Agitator 



Solution 
to waste 



Water 



Reagents 



Flotation Tailing to waste ^ 

I 

ice 

i 



Mn concentrate 



Thickener 



Kiln 



Overflow 



•Dust collector 



Exhaust J 

I Sludge 

Stack to waste 



Synthetic Mn oxide 



Cooler 



Conveyor Fluxes Reductant 

*^^ ^^~^^». T .*<^-— - — lron ore 

Stockpile Electric furnace 

Gases Slag Ferromanganese 
Dust collector 



Exhaust 



I 



Sludge 



Stack 



FIGURE 14. - Generalized flowsheet of a pro= 
posed ferromanganese plant. 

three 25-MW, submerged resistance fur- 
naces. The furnaces would be charged 
with calcine as well as limestone, sil- 
ica flux, and iron ore; coke would be 
added as a reductant. Daily materials 
consumption at full capacity would be 
about 1,000 t manganese oxide calcine, 
320 t limestone, 90 t silica flux, 90 t 
iron ore, and 320 t coke. Slag would be 
skimmed, granulated, and combined with 
other wastes for disposal. Molten ferro- 
manganese at approximately 1,400° C would 
be poured in molds, cooled, and prepared 
for shipment. 



Liquid wastes from the washing and con- 
centration steps would be combined with 
tailing, treated to adjust pH, and pumped 
to tailing disposal. Dust and sludge 
would be recycled to the maximum extent 
possible, and after suitable treatment, 
purge streams would be disposed of with 
other manufacturing wastes. 

Assuming the existence of an adequate 
market , the ferromanganese plant would 
operate 330 d/y, processing about 1.4 
million t of tailing and producing ap- 
proximately 210,000 t of ferromanganese 
containing 78 pet manganese. Facilities 
would require approximately 30 ha of 
land. Power would be purchased. 

WASTE DISPOSAL 

Tailings from the Cuprion plant and 
ferromanganese operation, would be pumped 
to conventional tailings impoundments 
which would be as much as 100 km from the 
process plant. Manufacturing wastes, 
such as lime boil and stack gas scrub- 
ber sludge, combustion ash, and sludge 
derived from water treatment operations 
would be treated by well-established 
techniques and combined with tailings for 
disposal. 

Tailing impoundments probably would be 
totally enclosed and lined with clay 
or other impermeable material. Granu- 
lated slag could be a secondary source of 
bank material if a ferromanganese plant 
were in operation. As active ponds fill, 
new ones would be constructed alongside. 
In accordance with county, State, and 
Federal regulations, inactive ponds would 
be covered with topsoil or treated in 
various ways to stabilize them. A de- 
canting system would remove and recycle 
water to the process plant. 



CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS 



DISCUSSION 

Capital and operating costs are based 
on equipment, capacities, and operating 
parameters discussed in the previous 



section of this report. Costs were ob- 
tained from many sources, some unpub- 
lished. Those sources most relied upon 
include Flipse (17), Brown ( _7_) , and A. D. 
Little (6), mining and benef iciation 



29 



costs; Andrews (4-5 ) , transportation and 
ship costs; Shaw (41) and Tinsley (45) , 
general costs. Gale (23) provided ferro- 
manganese plant costs. All figures are 
in January 1981 dollars. Indexing data 
were supplied by Flipse (17) and a Bureau 
of Mines cost index computer program. 



CAPITAL COSTS 

Tables 9, 10, and 11 contain capital 
cost information on mining, transporta- 
tion, and processing for each of the 
three potential mining ventures. 



TABLE 9. - Mine capital costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3, million 1981 dollars 



1 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 



2 — 2.4 million 
dry t/yr 



3—3.0 million 
dry t/yr 



Exploration (6 yr) , 

Research and development... 
2 mine ships 

pipelines (1 spare) 

collectors 

pumping systems 

sets of onboard equipment, 
Total fixed capital. . . 

Startup costs * 

Working capital (1.5 yr) 2 .. 
Total mine investment. 



$19.8 
69.3 

193.8 

55.1 

7.3 

33.0 

76.2 



$19.8 
69.3 

198.0 
66.1 
10.1 
30.6 
74.8 



$19.8 
69.3 

189.5 

50.1 

6.6 

26.0 

76.2 



454.5 
21.2 
63.0 



468.7 
21.2 
70.0 



437.5 
21.2 
62.7 



538.7 



559.9 



521.4 



Startup capital covers extraordinary costs associated with nodule collector test- 
ing and debugging. 

2 Based on operating costs about 20 pet greater than 
ating costs result from lower startup capacity. Dur 
2.25 million t would be mined by ventures 1 and 3, 
venture 2. 



normal. The higher unit oper- 
ing the 1st 1.5 yr an estimated 
1.8 million t would be mined by 



TABLE 10. - Transportation capital costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3, 
million 1981 dollars 



1 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 



2 — 2.4 million 
dry t/yr 



3 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 



Transport vessels * 

Slurry terminal 

Slurry pipeline 

High-speed supply boat 

Total fixed capital 

Working capital (1.5 yr) 2 

Total transportation investment. 



$256.1 

36.0 

18.2 

1.4 



$192.1 

29.5 

16.0 

1.4 



311.7 
38.3 



238.0 
28.7 



350.0 



266.7 



$192.1 
36.0 
18.2 

1.4 



247.7 
30.5 



278.2 



*4 transports for venture 1, 3 transports for ventures 2 and 3. 

2 Based on operating costs about 20 pet greater than estimated unit costs during 
full production. The higher costs result from lower startup capacity. During the 
1st 1.5 yr approximately 2.25 million t would be transported by ventures 1 and 3, 
about 1.8 million t would be transported by venture 2. 



30 



TABLE 11. - Cuprion and f erromanganese plant capital costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3, 
million 1981 dollars 





1 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 


2 — 2.4 million 
dry t/yr 


3 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 


CUPRION PLANT 


$72.7 

387.0 

166.2 

26.4 

18.4 

2.4 

5.1 


$72.7 

331.0 

142.2 

22.6 

15.1 

2.2 

5.1 


$72.7 




387.0 




166.2 




26.4 




18.4 
2.4 




5.1 




678.2 
78.8 


590.9 
65.7 


678.2 




78.8 




757.0 


656.6 


757.0 


FERROMANGANESE PLANT 


74.8 
18.0 


74.8 
18.0 


74.8 
18.0 




92.8 
36.5 


92.8 
35.2 


92.8 




36.5 


Total f erromanganese investment. 


129.3 


128.0 


129.3 




886.3 


784.6 


886.3 







^ased on operating costs averaging 
During the 1.25-yr startup period, ventu 
million t of nodules, venture 2 would 
to f erromanganese would be about 850,000 
ture 2. 



about 1/3 more than full production costs. 

res 1 and 3 would process an estimated 1.63 

handle 1.30 million t. Tailing processed 

t for ventures 1 and 3, 650,000 t for ven- 



Included in mine capital are monies for 
6 yr of prospecting and detailed mine ex- 
ploration. Once mining commences, this 
expense would be treated as an operating 
cost. Research and development capital 
of $142 million is split almost evenly 
between mine and processing ( 17) . Work- 
ing capital is based on 1.5 yr operating 
expenses for mine and transportation, and 
1.25 yr for processing. Additional capi- 
tal is allowed for mine startup because 
of the extraordinary cost of testing and 
debugging the collector. Mining ships 
are assumed to be new and constructed in 
U.S. shipyards. Dredges, pipelines, and 
onboard slurry handling equipment are 
also assumed to be built in the United 
States. Transportation capital includes 
purchase of European-built transport ves- 
sels, construction of a slurry terminal 
and pipeline to the plant, and initial 
expenses of a high-speed supply boat. 

Capital for the Cuprion and ferroman- 
ganese plants does not include expenses 



for infrastructure, such as a townsite, 
but does include money for a rail spur 
line and road to the property; a 100-km 
slurry line to waste disposal; all land 
purchases; and installation of turbines 
for internal generation of power suffi- 
cient for most Cuprion process require- 
ment needs. Power for the f erromanganese 
plant would be purchased. 

The most significant differences in 
capital requirements among ventures 1, 2, 
and 3 involving raining and transportation 
are increased costs associated with the 
larger collector for venture 2 and the 
purchase of an additional transport for 
venture 1. However, the largest single 
factor bearing on capital costs is Cupri- 
on processing capacity difference between 
venture 2 and the other two operations. 
Total capital requirement is estimated 
to be about $100 million less for 
venture 2. 



31 



OPERATING COSTS 

Tables 12, 13, and 14 contain estimates 
of operating costs for mining, transport- 
ing, and processing nodule ore. Mainte- 
nance and repair and labor costs are 
by far the largest expenses, account- 
ing for 64 pet of total operating ex- 
penses. Operation of the terminal-to- 
plant pipeline, fuel, and fixed vessel 



expenses compose the bulk of transporta- 
tion costs. 

The bulk of Cuprion processing costs 
are attributable to miscellaneous capital 
charges, fuel (coal), and utilities and 
labor. Electrical power is by far the 
largest single cost item for operation of 
the ferromanganese plant. 



TABLE 12. - Mine operating costs, 1 ventures 1, 2, and 3, million 1981 dollars 





1 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 


2 — 2.4 million 
dry t/yr 


3 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 




$18.4 
2.0 
27.2 
5.5 
8.6 
.1 
6.0 


$18.4 
2.0 
30.8 
5.7 
9.6 
.2 
6.0 


$18.4 




2.0 




26.6 


Fuel 


5.3 

8.0 




.1 
6.0 








67.8 
3.7 


72.7 
4.0 


66.4 




3.7 




71.5 

$23.80 


76.7 
$32.00 


70.1 




$23.40 



1 Based on operation of 2 complete systems. 



TABLE 13. - Transportation operating costs, ventures 1, 2, and 3, 
million 1981 dollars 





1 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 


2 — 2.4 million 
dry t/yr 


3 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 


Wages, benefits, subsistence, mainte- 


$15.7 

12.8 

1.2 

.8 


$11.8 

8.7 

.9 

.6 


$11.8 


Fuel 


9.0 




.9 




.6 




30.5 
1.7 


22.0 
1.7 


22.3 


Supply vessel (including moorage).... 


1.7 




32.2 
2.7 
5.6 


23.7 
2.2 

4.6 


24.0 




2.7 




5.6 




40.5 
2.4 


30.5 
1.7 


32.3 




2.0 




42.9 

$14.30 


32.2 
$13.40 


34.3 




$11.40 



32 



TABLE 14. - Cuprion and ferromanganese plant operating cost, ventures 1, 2, and 3, 
million 1981 dollars 





1 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 


2 — 2.4 million 
dry t/yr 


3 — 3.0 million 
dry t/yr 


CUPRION PLANT 


$4.0 

35.9 

16.5 

6.9 

37.0 

2.4 

.2 


$3.3 

29.4 

13.5 

5.6 

31.7 

2.1 

.2 


$4.0 




35.9 
16.5 




6.9 


Capital charges (maintenance, mate- 


37.0 

2.4 

.2 




102.9 
5.1 


85.8 
4.3 


102.9 




5.1 




108.0 


90.1 


108.0 


FERROMANGANESE PLANT 1 
Materials and supplies (including 


22.2 

48.9 

14.4 

6.3 


22.2 
48.9 

14.4 
6.3 


22.2 
48.9 




14.4 
6.3 




91.8 
4.6 


91.8 
4.6 


91.8 




4.6 








96.4 


96.4 


96.4 


Total annual cost (both 
Cost per dry metric ton: 


204.4 

$36.00 
32.10 


186.5 

$37.50 

40.20 


204.4 
$36.00 




32.10 




68.10 


77.70 


68.10 



final ferromanganese 



1 Includes flotation, calcining, smelting, and handling of the 
product. Capacity would be 1.4 million t/yr for all ventures. 

Calculated on basis of total dry metric tons of nodule material processed, not 
just quantity processed in ferromanganese plant. 



Operating cost differences among the 
three ventures somewhat parallel differ- 
ences in investment costs. The larger, 
heavier collector is primarily responsi- 
ble for high costs of venture 2 mining, 
while running an extra transport vessel 
over longer distances makes transporta- 
tion of venture 1 ore most costly. Econ- 
omy of scale for Cuprion processing 
results in slightly cheaper processing of 
nodules for ventures 1 and 3. 

COST SUMMARY 

Capital and operating costs discussed 
in previous sections are summarized in 



tables 15 and 16. Initial investments 
are large, ranging from about $1.5 to 
nearly $1.7 billion for a three-metal 
nickel, copper, and cobalt operation. A 
plant to process approximately 1.4 mil- 
lion t tails annually to produce ferro- 
manganese would require about $130 mil- 
lion additional capital. Estimates of 
operating costs are from $71 to $83 
per dry metric ton without manganese 
recovery and from $103 to $123 per 
dry metric ton with production of 
ferromanganese . 

Probably no effective means exist to 
significantly reduce capital costs for 



33 



TABLE 15. - Capital cost summary, ventures 1, 2, and 3, 
million 1981 dollars 





1 


2 


3 




$538.7 
350.0 
757.0 


$559.9 
266.7 
656.6 


$521.4 
278.2 
757.0 


Total 


1,645.7 
129.3 


1,483.2 
128.0 


1,556.6 




129.3 




1,775.0 


1,611.2 


1,685.9 



* Capacity, and consequently investment, would remain con- 
stant for the ferromanganese plants except for slightly less 



working capital for venture 2; a result of 
capacity. 



lower startup 



TABLE 16. - Operating cost summary, ventures 1, 2, and 3, 1981 
dollars per dry metric ton 





1 


2 


3 




$23.80 
14.30 
36.00 


$32.00 
13.40 
37.50 


$23.40 




11.40 




36.00 


Total 


74.10 
32.10 


82.90 
40.20 


70.80 




32.10 




106.20 


123.10 


102.90 



mine, transportation, or benef iciation 
systems as conceived and described. How- 
ever, operating costs, particularly mine 
operating costs, might decrease as expe- 
rience is gained. Other mine systems 
such as a continuous line bucket, could 
possibly cost less to build and operate, 
but technical feasibility has yet to be 
demonstrated. Scaling down to 1 million 
dry t/yr, for example, would reduce capi- 
tal, but increase unit operating costs. 

A reduction in transportation costs 
could be realized for ventures 1 and 2 by 



placing the processing plant nearer the 
minesite, possibly on the island of 
Hawaii. The number of transports and 
distances traveled would be reduced but 
increased energy and land costs could 
possibly offset savings. 

A savings of plant capital could be 
accomplished by purchasing power for 
operations instead of installing genera- 
tors or by using oil-burning rather than 
coal-burning equipment. Both actions, 
however, would probably result in sig- 
nificant increases in operating costs. 



FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 7 



Financial analyses were carried out us- 
ing the Bureau of Mines MINSIM4 computer 
program ( 47 ) . This program calculates 
either the discounted cash flow rate of 
return (DCFROR) or determines a product 
value requisite to achieve a given 

7 B. B. Gosling, physical scientist, 
Western Field Operations Center ran the 
computer program and provided expert 
advice. 



DCFROR. Both analyses were conducted for 
ventures 1, 2, and 3, with and without 
additional investment for a ferromanga- 
nese plant. The target DCFROR used for 
the metal value determination option was 
15 pet, an amount considered minimally 
attractive to any potential mine opera- 
tor. Considering the high technical and 
political risks, a DCFROR of twice this 
amount (30 pet) would be more in line for 
a deep ocean mining venture. 



34 



Several assumptions were made in the 
analyses which have a material impact on 
results. First, financing is assumed to 
be 100 pet equity capital. Therefore, 
there are no finance charges such as cap- 
italized interest during construction or 
interest expense during the subsequent 
operational period, when loans are nor- 
mally amortized. 

Because of the high degree of uncer- 
tainty in predicting reasonable values 10 
to 15 yr hence, no escalation factors for 
costs or metal prices have been applied. 
The assumption is that average costs and 
revenues will escalate at the same rate 
as inflation. Included in the analyses 
are allowances for State and Federal in- 
come taxes, property taxes, and a 0.75- 
pct excise tax on gross value required by 
the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources 
Act. Depletion allowances of 15 pet for 
copper and 22 pet for nickel, cobalt, and 
f erromanganese are also included. 

A relatively aggressive project devel- 
opment schedule for all three ventures is 
depicted in figure 15 (see reference 30 
for detailed discussion of investment 
timing). Research and development, pros- 
pecting, and exploration costs before 
year 1 are previously written off and 
not included in the financial analyses. 
Because of the requirement for 
extraordinary physical detail, minesite 



exploration would begin immediately and 
would continue through year 29, except 
for years 7 through 9 when the explora- 
tion ship and crew would participate in 
full-scale mining tests. Plant construc- 
tion would occur in years 5 through 8 and 
ship construction would take place in 
years 6 through 9. Modifications devel- 
oped during full-scale testing of the 
first ship would be incorporated in the 
second ship. Partial production would 
begin in year 10, and full production 
would be scheduled for years 12 through 
30. For financial purposes, exploration 
cost is considered a capital cost prior 
to startup and an operating cost 
thereafter. 

Table 17 shows total revenues derived 
from each venture based on the following 
prices, in January 1981 dollars: 

Nickel: 

Per kilogram $7.72 

Per pound 3.50 

Copper: 

Per kilogram 1 .97 

Per pound .89 

Cobalt: 

Per kilogram 15.44 

Per pound 7 . 00 

Ferromanganese (78 pet Mn) : 

Per metric ton 502.00 

Per long ton 510.00 



i i i 



Research and development 

' 1 



Plant and ship construction 



Startup 



Detailed 



■ ■ 



Full production 



exploration 



J— L 



i i i i i 



•H 



i i i i I i I i i i 



10 



20 



15 
YEARS 

FIGURE 15. - Project development schedule. 



25 



30 



35 



TABLE 17. - Total commodity revenues, ventures 1, 2, and 3, 
million January 1981 dollars 



Nickel 

Copper 

Cobalt 

3-metal total 

Ferromanganese (78 pet Mn) 
4-metal total 



1 



$5,309 
1,042 
1,212 



7,563 
2,052 



9,615 



$4,737 
1,034 
1,154 



6,925 
1,606 



8,531 



$5,432 
1,084 
1,500 



8,016 
1,978 



9,994 



The January 1981 cobalt price was consid- 
ered artificially high; therefore, it was 
set at twice the nickel price — the ap- 
proximate historical (1957-76) ratio be- 
tween the prices. 

Nickel, by far the most important com- 
modity, would produce 54 to 56 pet of the 
revenue for four-metal operations and 
68 to 70 pet for three-metal plants. If, 
despite the significant increase in sup- 
ply, cobalt prices were to remain high, 
cobalt would rival nickel as the major 
revenue producer. 

Discounted cash flow rate of return 
forecasts by the Bureau's MINSIM4 program 
are shown in table 18. All results are 
based on descriptions, costs, and sched- 
uling contained in this and previous sec- 
tions. Projected rates of return are 
very low. Venture 3, three-metal opera- 
tion, is potentially the the most profit- 
able, followed by venture 3, four-metal 



operation. Interestingly enough, inclu- 
sion of a ferromanganese plant decreases 
the apparent profitability of all three 
ventures. 

TABLE 18. - Projected rates of return, 
ventures 1, 2, and 3, percent 



Venture 


3-metal 
process 


4-metal 
process 


1 


4.1 
5.0 
6.0 


3.5 


2 

3 


2.7 
5.2 



Additional MINSIM4 runs were completed 
for each venture to determine revenue 
increases required to produce a DCFROR 
of 15 pet. In general, a 60- to 80-pct 
increase in total revenue would be re- 
quired to achieve this modest return on 
capital for three- and four-metal opera- 
tions. It is doubtful that such a real 
gain in metal prices will occur in the 
near future. 



PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY 



In all likelihood, no significant pro- 
duction of manganese nodules will occur 
in the foreseeable future. Economic, 
political, and, to a lesser extent, tech- 
nical factors combine to exert a large 
negative influence. Poor economics, a 
situation illustrated by the financial 
analyses in the previous section, is 
largely the result of depressed metal 
markets and high energy, labor, and mate- 
rial costs. 

Political uncertainty continues because 
the longstanding questions of rights and 
ownership of deep sea mineral resources 
continue unresolved despite passage of 
the Law of the Sea (LOS) Treaty. A total 



of 47 countries, including the United 
States, United Kingdom, Federal Republic 
of Germany, and Japan, did not sign the 
treaty even though certain ■'grandfather'* 
rights were accorded existing ocean min- 
ing consortia. The principal objection by 
industrialized nations is their lack of 
meaningful participation in future plan- 
ning and regulatory processes. Specifi- 
cally, resource development, production 
quotas, technology transfer, licensing, 
and taxation would be virtually con- 
trolled by developing countries. U.S. 
legislation (Public Law 96-283) , estab- 
lishing a domestic regulatory regime for 
mining deep ocean minerals , is presently 
being used as a basis for negotiations 



36 



between nonsignatories. The intent is 
to establish a series of reciprocat- 
ing states agreements through which min- 
ing could take place outside the LOS 
Treaty. 

The major technological problem is 
whether full mine production can be 
reached and sustained for the life of the 
project. Collector effectiveness and re- 
liability are probably the biggest un- 
knowns. Certain aspects of ore handling 
and processing will require additional 
research and development, but appear to 
be well within current technological 
capabilities. 

If, in spite of the aforementioned 
problems, development does occur, then 



the U.S. supply position of cer- 
tain strategic metals would improve 
materially. Information in table 19 
illustrates this point. U.S. consumption 
of nickel, copper, cobalt, and manganese 
in 1978 is listed, as well as projected 
consumption in years 1990 and 2000. The 
significant 1978 reliance on imports of 
nickel, cobalt, and manganese is also 
indicated. This reliance is expected to 
continue at a high level. Inspection of 
annual production figures from proposed 
ventures 1, 2, and 3 show that just one 
operation would produce from 12 to 13 pet 
of the projected nickel requirements, 31 
to Al pet of cobalt needs, and 10 pet of 
the manganese requirements in 1990, 
and somewhat less of projected needs in 
year 2000. Production from all three 



TABLE 19. - Comparison of U.S. consumption 1 of nickel, copper, cobalt, and 
manganese with potential production from ventures 1, 2, and 3 





Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mn 


Consumption, thousand t: 

Actual , 1978 


163.7 

272.2 

399.2 

80 


1,879 

2,500 

3,200 

20 


8.8 

12.5 

15.9 

95 


1,236 


Projected, 1990 


1,615 


Projected, 2000 .- 


1,814 




97 


Potential annual production, 2 thousand t: 


35.9 
32.0 
36.7 


27.6 
27.4 
28.7 


4.1 
3.9 
5.1 


163.8 




163.8 




163.8 




104.6 


83.7 


13.1 


491.4 


Amount of projected consumption supplied, pet: 
1990: 


13 
12 
13 


1 
1 
1 


33 
31 
41 


10 




10 




10 




38 


3 


105 


30 


2000: 


9 
8 
9 


<1 
<1 
<1 


26 
24 
32 


9 




9 




9 




26 


<3 


82 


27 



^Consumption figures do not include utilization of recycled metals, 
primary production. Projected (46) annual growth of primary usage 
1978 base is as follows, in percent: Ni , 3.7; Cu, 2.4; Co, 2.5; Mn, 

2 Venture production based on the following recoveries, in percent 
92; Cu, 92; Co, 65. Production of Mn for each venture would be 163 
(210,000 t ferromanganese (78 pet Mn)). 



only 
from a 
1.4. 
: Ni, 
,800 t 



Source: References 9, 32, 40, 42, and 46. 



37 



ventures would probably eliminate need 
for imported cobalt, and drastically re- 
duce U.S. reliance on foreign nickel and 



manganese, while having a very minor ef- 
fect on the domestic copper industry. 



SUMMARY 



Based on analysis of available resource 
data for study areas in the northeast 
Pacific Ocean, three subareas appear to 
contain manganese nodule deposits with 
the best potential for economic mining. 
These encompass or are adjacent to the 
three DOMES Sites and are designated sub- 
areas All, Bill, and CI. Subarea All 
(36,000 km 2 ) contains an estimated 67.0 
million dry t of recoverable resource, 
with a grade of 1.30 wt pet nickel, 
1.00 wt pet copper, and 0.21 wt pet co- 
balt. Subarea Bill (64,600 km 2 ) contains 
an estimated 66.9 million dry t of recov- 
erable nodules , with an apparent grade of 
1.45 wt pet nickel, 1.24 wt pet copper, 
and 0.25 wt pet cobalt. Subarea CI 
(57,600 km 2 ) contains an estimated recov- 
erable resource of 148.8 million dry t 
of nodules grading 1.33 wt pet nickel, 
1.04 wt pet copper, and 0.26 wt pet co- 
balt. Estimated manganese grade for the 
three subareas ranges between 26.8 and 
27.8 wt pet. 

Costing of the proposed system to mine, 
transport, and beneficiate the nodule 
ore, indicates initial investments and 
operation costs will be large. For 
three-metal recovery of nickel, copper, 
and cobalt, anticipated capital invest- 
ments range from $1.5 billion to $1.7 
billion (January 1981 costs); estimated 
operating costs are from $71 to $83 per 
metric ton of ore. If manganese is also 
recovered in an optional 1.4 million t/yr 
f erromanganese plant, estimated capital 
costs would increase nearly $130 million; 
operating costs would add an additional 
$32 to $40 per metric ton of nodules 
mined. 

It may be difficult to significantly 
reduce costs of the system as conceived 
and described. Scaling down capacity, 
purchasing power for the Cuprion plant 



rather than installing generators, 
or switching from coal- to oil-burning 
equipment would reduce capital require- 
ments , but would raise unit operating 
costs. Transportation costs, both capi- 
tal and operating, would be lower if 
processing were carried out closer to 
the minesite possibly on the island of 
Hawaii. Fewer transport vessels would be 
needed and distances traveled would be 
shorter. However, increased land and 
energy costs could partially offset 
savings. Operating costs, particularly 
those associated with mining, could be 
lowered as experience is gained. 

Financial analyses of proposed opera- 
tions predict discounted cash flow rates 
of return ranging from 2.7 to 6.0 pet. 
Operations with ferromanganese recovery 
may be slightly less profitable than 
those without. At best, these rates of 
return are only a fifth of the approxi- 
mately 30-pct return that might be needed 
to attract venture capital. Presently, 
it is difficult to envision any manganese 
nodule operation, based on current tech- 
nology and economics , that can realize 
more than a marginally acceptable 
profit. 

If mining of nodules does occur in the 
near future, a significant lessening of 
U.S. reliance on imported nickel, cobalt, 
and manganese would be achieved. Just 
one proposed venture could supply the 
following percentages of projected U.S. 
demands for 1990: nickel, 12 to 13; 
cobalt, 31 to 41; and manganese, 10. 
Production from all three ventures would 
drastically reduce dependence on imported 
nickel and manganese and essentially 
eliminate the need for foreign cobalt. 
Detrimental effects on the domestic cop- 
per industry would be negligible. 



38 



REFERENCES 



1. Agarwal, J. C, H. E. Barner, 
N. Beecher, D. S. Davies , and R. N. Kust. 
Kennecott Process for Recovery of Copper, 
Nickel, Cobalt, and Molybdenum From 
Ocean Nodules. Min. Eng. , v. 31, 1979, 
pp. 1704-1707. 

2. Agarwal, J. C, N. Beecher, D. S. 
Davies, G. L. Hubred, V. K. Kakaria, and 
R. N. Kust. Processing of Ocean Nod- 
ules: A Technical and Economic Review. 
J. Met., v. 28, No. 4, 1976, pp. 24-31. 

3. American Association of Petroleum 
Geologists. Geographic Map of the 
Circum-Pacif ic Region-Northeast Quadrant. 
Tulsa, OK, 1977. 

4. Andrews, B. V. Relative Costs of 
U.S. and Foreign Nodule Transport Ships 
(contract 7-13775, B. V. Andrews Trans- 
portation Consultant). U.S. Dept. of 
Commerce-NOAA, Office of Marine Miner- 
als, Rockville, MD, 1978, 70 pp.; NTIS 
PB 283194. 

5. Andrews, B. V. (B. V. Andrews 
Transportation Consultant) . Private com- 
munication, 1981; available upon re- 
quest from C. T. Hillman, BuMines , Spo- 
kane, WA. 

6. Arthur D. Little, Inc. Technolog- 
ical and Economic Assessment of Manganese 
Nodule Mining and Processing (Revised) 
(contract 14-01-0001-2114). U.S. Dept. 
of the Interior, Office of Minerals Pol- 
icy and Research Analysis, Washington, 
DC, 1979, 75 pp. 

7. Brown, F. (E.I.C. Corp.). Private 
communication, 1981; available upon re- 
quest from C. T. Hillman, BuMines, Spo- 
kane, WA. 

8. Dames & Moore, and E.I.C. Corpora- 
tion. Description of Manganese Nodule 
Processing Activities for Environment 
Studies, Vol. III. Processing Systems 
Technical Analysis (contract 6-35331). 
U.S. Dept. of Commerce-NOAA, Office of 



Marine Minerals, Rockville, MD, 1977, 
540 pp.; NTIS PB 274912 (set). 

9. DeHuff, G. L. , and T. S. Jones. 
Manganese. Ch. in Mineral Facts and 
Problems, 1980 Edition. BuMines B 671, 
1981, pp. 549-562. 

10. Felix, D. Some Problems in Making 
Nodule Abundance Estimates From Seafloor 
Photographs. Marine Min., v. 2, 1980, 
pp. 293-302. 

11. Fewkes, R. H. , W. D. McFarland, 
W. R. Reinhart, and R. K. Sorem. Devel- 
opment of a Reliable Method for Evalua- 
tion of Deep Sea Manganese Nodule Depos- 
its (grant GO274013, WA State Univ.). 
BuMines OFR 64-80, 1979, 94 pp.; NTIS 
PB 80-182116. 

12. . Evaluation of Metal Re- 
sources at and Near Proposed Deep Sea 
Mine Sites (grant GO284008, WA State 
Univ.). BuMines OFR 108-80, 1980, 
239 pp.; NTIS PB 80-228992. 

13. Fewkes, R. H. , W. D. McFarland, 
and R. K. Sorem. Manganese Nodule Re- 
source Data, Sea Scope Expedition (grant 
GO284008, WA State Univ.). BuMines OFR 
144-81, 1981; NTIS PB 82-142571. 

14. Fisk, M. B., J. Z. Frazer, J. S. 
Elliott, and L. L. Wilson. Availability 
of Copper, Nickel, Cobalt, and Manganese 
From Ocean Ferromanganese Nodules (II) 
(grant GO254024, Scripps Inst. Oceanog- 
raphy). BuMines OFR 140(l)-80, 1979, 
63 pp.; NTIS PB 81-145963. 

15. Flipse, J. E. An Engineering Ap- 
proach to Ocean Mining. Pres. at Off- 
shore Tech. Conf., Houston, TX, May 1969, 
Paper 1035, 15 pp. 

16. . Deep Ocean Mining Pollu- 
tion Mitigation. Pres. at Offshore Tech. 
Conf., Houston, TX, May 1980, Paper 3834, 
5 pp. 



39 



17. Flipse, J. E. (J. E. Flipse Marine 
Mining Consultant). Private communica- 
tion, 1981; available upon request from 
C. T. Hillman, BuMines , Spokane, WA. 

18. Frazer, J. Z. Manganese Nodule 
Reserves: An Updated Estimate. Marine 
Min., v. 1, 1977, pp. 103-123. 

19. Frazer, J. Z., and G. Arrhenius. 
World-wide Distribution of Ferromanganese 
Nodules and Element Concentrations in Se- 
lected Pacific Ocean Nodules. U.S. Na- 
tional Science Foundation-IDOE, Washing- 
ton, DC, 1972, 51 pp.; NTIS PB 234011. 

20. Frazer, J. Z. , and M. B. Fisk. 
Availability of Copper, Nickel, Cobalt, 
and Manganese From Ocean Ferromanganese 
Nodules (III) (grant GO264024, Scripps 
Inst. Oceanography). BuMines OFR 140 
(2)-80, 1979, 112 pp.; NTIS PB 81-145971. 



21. 



Geological Factors Related 



to Characteristics of Seafloor Manganese 
Nodule Deposits (grant GO264024, Scripps 
Inst. Oceanography). BuMines OFR 142-80, 
1980, 41 pp.; NTIS PB 81-145831. 

22. Frazer, J. Z., M. B. Fisk, J. El- 
liott, M. White, and L. Wilson. Availa- 
bility of Copper, Nickel, Cobalt, and 
Manganese From Ocean Ferromanganese Nod- 
ules (grant GO264024, Scripps Inst. 
Oceanography). BuMines OFR 121-79, 1978, 
141 pp.; NTIS PB 300 356. 

23. Gale, G. D. (U.S. Bureau of 
Mines). Private communication, 1981; 
available upon request from C. T. Hill- 
man, BuMines, Spokane, WA. 

24. Grote, P. B., and W. Gayman. A 
Technical Basis for the Development of 
Deep Ocean Mining Regulations (contract 
J0177131, Sci. Applications, Inc.). Bu- 
Mines OFR 87-80, 1979, 310 pp. 

25. Heezen, B. C. , and M. Tharp. 
Bathymetric and Nodule Assessment Map 
Series, Northeast Equatorial Pacific 
Ocean. U.S. Geol. Surv. Misc. Invest. 
Series. Maps 1-1094 A - 1-1094 0, 1978. 



26. Hillman, C. T. Manganese Nodule 
Resources of Site C, Northeast Equatorial 
Pacific Ocean. Unpublished BuMines re- 
port, 1980, 43 pp.; available for consul- 
tation at Western Field Operations Cen- 
ter, Spokane, WA. 

27. Hillman, C. T., and R. D. Weldin. 
A Preliminary Evaluation of a Deep Ocean 
Polymetallic Nodule Deposit. Unpublished 
BuMines report, 1976, 38 pp.; available 
for consultation at Western Field Opera- 
tions Center, Spokane, WA. 

28. Hillman, C. T., and N. Wetzel. 
Manganese Nodule Resources Within the 
Northeast Pacific High Grade Zone. Un- 
published BuMines report, 1980, 85 pp.; 
available for consultation at Western 
Field Operations Center, Spokane, WA. 

29. Horn, D. R. , B. M. Horn, and 
M. N. Delach. Sedimentary Provinces, 
North Pacific. Chart compiled by Lamont- 
Doherty Geol. Observatory, Columbia 
Univ., Palisades, NY, 1973. 

30. Jugel, M. K. Deep Seabed Mining 
Industrial Development — Approaches and 
Their Timing. NOAA Draft Report, July 
22, 1982, 15 pp.; available for consulta- 
tion at Office of Marine Minerals, Rock- 
ville, MD. 

31. Kollwentz, W. Prospecting and Ex- 
ploration of Manganese Nodule Occur- 
rences. Ch. in Review of the Activities; 
Edition 18, Manganese Nodules - Metals 
from the Sea. Metallgesellschaf t AG, 
1975, pp. 12-26. 

32. Matthews, N. A., and S. F. Sibley. 
Nickel. Ch. in Mineral Facts and 
Problems, 1980 Edition. BuMines B 671, 
1981, pp. 611-627. 

33. Menard, H. W. Marine Geology of 
the Pacific. McGraw-Hill, 1964, 271 pp. 

34. Moncrieff, A. G., and K. B. Smale- 
Adams . The Economics of First Generation 
Manganese Nodule Operations. Min. Congr. 
J., v. 60, No. 12, 1974, pp. 46-50. 



40 



35. Monhemius , A. J. The Extractive 
Metallurgy of Deep Sea Manganese Nodules. 
Ch. in Topics in Nonferrous Extractive 
Metallurgy. Soc. Chem. Ind., 1980, 
pp. 42-69. 

36. Mudie, J. D. , J. A. Grow, and 
J. S. Bessey. A Near-Bottom Survey of 
Lineated Abyssal Hills in the Equatorial 
Pacific. Ch. in Marine Geophysical 
Researches 1. D. Reidel Publ. Co., 1972, 
pp. 397-411. 

37. Ozturgut, E., G . C. Anderson, 
R. E. Burns, J. W. Lavaelle, and S. A. 
Swift. Deep Ocean Mining of Manganese in 
the North Pacific, Premining Environ- 
mental Conditions and Anticipated Mining 
Effects. U.S. Dept. of Commerce-NOAA 
Tech. Memorandum ERL MESA-33, 1978, 
133 pp.; available upon request from 
C. T. Hillman, BuMines , Spokane, WA. 

38. Piper, D. Z. (comp.). Deep Ocean 
Environmental Study: Geology and Geo- 
chemistry of DOMES Sites A, B, and C, 
Equatorial North Pacific. U.S. Geol. 
Surv. OFR 77-778, 1977, pp. 217-266; 
available for consultation at U.S. Geo- 
logical Survey libraries in Menlo Park, 
CA, Golden, CO, and Reston, VA. 

39. Ryan, W. B. T. , and B. C. Heezen. 
Smothering of Deep Sea Benthic Commun- 
ities From Natural Disasters. 1976, 
132 pp.; NTIS PB 279527/AS. 

40. Schroeder, H. J., and J. H. Jolly. 
Copper. Ch. in Mineral Facts and Prob- 
lems, 1980 Edition. BuMines B 671, 1981, 
pp. 227-244. 

41. Shaw, J. L. The Economics of an 
Ocean Mining Project. Pres. at 4th In- 
ternat. Ocean Development Conf., Tokyo, 
Japan, 1976, 14 pp.; available upon 



request from C. T. Hillman, BuMines, Spo- 
kane , WA . 

42. Sibley, S. F. Cobalt. Ch. in 
Mineral Facts and Problems, 1980 Edition. 
BuMines B 671, 1981, pp. 199-214. 

43. Sorem, R. K. , and R. H. Fewkes. 
Manganese Nodule Research Data, and Meth- 
ods of Investigation. IFI/Plenum, 1979, 
723 pp. 

44. Sullivan, A. F., and F. A. Ruggeri. 
Submerged Pumps for Deep Ocean Min- 
ing. CIMBull., v. 67, No. 752, 1974, 
pp. 80-85. 

45. Tins ley, C. R. Manganese Nodule 
Mining Industry: A Study of Expected In- 
vestment Requirements. Ch. in Manganese 
Nodules, Dimensions, and Perspectives. 
D. Reidel Publ. Co., 1979, pp. 119-138. 

46. U.S. Bureau of Mines. Mineral 
Commodity Summaries. 1981, pp. 36, 49, 
94, 104. 

47. . MINSIM4/0PEN Documenta- 
tion. Unpublished internal document, 
1979, 58 pp.; available upon request from 
B. B. Gosling, BuMines, Spokane, WA. 

48. U.S. Navy. Marine Climatic Atlas 
of the World, Volume II, North Pacific 
Ocean. Director, Naval Oceanography and 
Meteorology, 1977, 388 pp. 

49. Van Andel, T. H. , G. R. Heath, and 
T. C. Moore. Cenozoic History and 
Paleoceanography of the Central Equato- 
rial Pacific Ocean: A Regional Synthesis 
of Deep Sea Drilling Data. Geol. Soc. 
Am. Memoir 143, 1975, 134 pp. 

50. Welling, C. G. Next Step in Ocean 
Mining — Large Scale Test. Min. Congr. 
J., v. 62, No. 12, 1976, pp. 46-51. 



41 



APPENDIX A.— DISCUSSION OF ABUNDANCE AND RESOURCE ESTIMATES 



Abundance is defined as the weight of 
nodules per unit area of seafloor, and is 
usually given in either wet or dry kilo- 
grams per square meter. This expression 
may be easily converted to metric tons 
per square kilometer by multiplying by a 
factor of 1,000. Therefore, an abun- 
dance of 6 kg/m 2 would be equivalent to 
6,000 t/km 2 . Dry abundance is only about 
70 pet of wet abundance, because nodules 
are extremely porous and contain approxi- 
mately 30 wt pet water. Therefore, a wet 
nodule abundance of 10 kg/m 2 would equal 
7 kg/m 2 dry. 

Resource quantities are generally ex- 
pressed in dry metric tons and are ob- 
tained by multiplying average dry abun- 
dance by the size (square kilometers) of 
the site being considered. If, for ex- 
ample, an area covers 10,000 km 2 and has 
an average wet abundance of 8.6 kg/m 2 , 
the resource quantity would be calculated 
as follows: 

1 . Convert wet abundance to dry 
abundance — 

8.6 kg/m 2 (wet) x 0.70 
= 6.0 kg/m 2 (dry). 

2. Convert dry abundance to metric 
tons per square kilometer — 

6.0 kg/m 2 (dry) x l x 10 6 m 2 /km 2 
= 6.0 x 10 6 kg/km 2 (dry). 

6.0 x 10 6 kg/km 2 * 1,000 kg/t 
= 6,000 t/km 2 . 

3. Determine resource quantity of 
10,000-km 2 area— 

6,000 t/km 2 (dry) x 10,000 km 2 
= 60,000,000 t (dry). 

Calculated in this manner, the total 
tonnage is considered a gross estimate, 
and should be reduced by a series of 
practical considerations to get a reason- 
able estimate of recoverable resource 
(see text). 



Abundances, the basis for resource es- 
timates, are derived from bottom sam- 
pling, seafloor photographs, and tele- 
vision video tapes. Bottom samples 
provide the best data. To determine 
abundance, recovered nodules are simply 
weighed and the weight is then divided by 
the area of seafloor sampled (a constant 
for each sampling device). 

Box cores and certain grab samplers , 
such as the 0kean-70 (Japanese) , take a 
large sample and thereby afford the 
most accurate estimate. Also, because of 
specialized construction and weight of 
these devices, there is a low probability 
that portions of the sample will be lost. 
Additionally, box core samples are rela- 
tively undisturbed and can be used for a 
variety of studies. The main drawback is 
that use of these devices is time consum- 
ing and expensive, because they must be 
lowered and raised by cable. Conversely, 
use of free-fall devices is comparatively 
cheap. Many can be launched overboard 
(without tether) and recovered in rela- 
tively short periods of time, but there 
is a continuing risk that an incom- 
plete sample will be taken or portions 
lost during ascent. Therefore, estimates 
based on grab samples are apt to be less 
than true abundances. 

Seafloor photography and television are 
excellent tools for judging continuity 
between sample points. However, diffi- 
culties exist in converting apparent nod- 
ule populations in photographs or video 
tapes to abundances . One problem is that 
individual nodule weights must be esti- 
mated by comparing cross-sectional area 
with graphs developed from nearby bottom 
sampling. A second, more serious problem 
is that portions of nodules are usually 
obscured by a light coating of sediment. 
Felix (10) 1 indicates that significantly 
low estimates may result. Correction 
factors can be determined and applied if 

^Underlined numbers in parentheses re- 
fer to items in the list of references 
preceding this appendix. 



42 



a detailed sampling program is carried 
out. No such detail is now publicly 
available. 

Abundances in this report are based on 
average estimates from 185 ship stations. 
Because raw data were developed on a 
random basis, no attempt was made to 



differentiate between estimates based on 
box cores , grab samples , or photographs , 
nor was more significance placed on any 
particular estimate method. This being 
the case, assigned abundances and conse- 
quently resource tonnages are probably 
low, and are considered minimum values. 



43 



APPENDIX B. —SAMPLE STATION LOCATIONS, ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES, AND ANALYSES 

FOR STUDY AREAS A, B, AND C 



This appendix contains a series of 
tables with all available sample data for 
each subarea. Tables B-7, B-ll, and B-14 



contain information from additional sam- 
ples taken from locations nearby, yet 
outside subarea boundaries. 



TABLE B-l. - Subarea AI — location, abundance, and analytical data 



Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysis, wt 


pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


206 


11.132 


148.072 






1.43 


1.19 


0.22 




29.30 


6.20 


207 


10.978 


148.325 






1.32 


1.12 


.21 




25.40 


6.53 


208 


11.030 


148.382 






1.48 


1.12 


.19 




25.00 


6.30 


209 


11.018 


148.498 






1.24 


1.03 


.20 


0.05 


25.00 


5.44 


210 


11.513 


148.578 






1.09 


.95 


.17 




22.40 


5.30 


211 


11.803 


148.662 






1.35 


1.31 


.20 


.06 


28.70 


5.78 


212 


11.233 


148.833 


NPr 
















213 


11.817 


148.933 


20-50 




.75 


.50 


.25 




20.00 


9.90 


214 


11.167 


148.950 


20-50 
















215 


11.487 


149.183 






1.10 


.77 


.24 


.02 


22.00 


7.62 


216 


12.023 


149.300 






1.31 


1.22 


.23 


.03 


27.30 


6.45 


217 


11.433 


149.283 






.79 


.50 


.18 




17.20 


14.50 


218 


11.667 


150.117 






1.28 


.95 


.23 




24.00 


6.95 


219 


11.970 


150.308 






1.23 


1.08 


.19 


.03 


24.50 


7.54 










1.20 

0.23 

12 


0.98 

0.26 

12 


0.21 

0.03 

12 


0.04 

0.02 

5 


24.23 

3.48 

12 


7.38 




Standard 
Number of 




2.56 






12 



NPr Nodules present, no additional information available. 
1 Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 



NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available. 



44 





TABLE B-2. - Subarea All — location, abundance, 


and analytical data 




Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysi 


s, wt pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


32 


9.035 


145.000 






1.43 


1.01 


0.17 


0.06 


30.90 


6.30 


33 


8.980 


145.110 






1.42 


1.17 


.18 


.06 


30.10 


5.90 


34 


8.955 


145.807 






1.62 


1.35 


.17 


.06 


28.30 


4.64 


35 


8.867 


146.440 




13.87 














36 


8.902 


146.443 




11.25 


1.47 


1.08 


.32 




27.40 


6.30 


37 


8.932 


146.445 




10.62 


1.56 


1.18 






29.50 


5.44 


38 


8.965 


146.445 




3.12 














39 


9.047 


146.457 




4.37 


1.89 


1.52 






32.00 


3.65 


40 


9.050 


146.487 




8.75 


1.52 


1.06 






31.00 


5.66 


41 


8.997 


146.497 




18.12 


1.31 


.74 






23.20 


7.77 


42 


8.958 


146.492 




1.87 


1.71 


1.23 






26.30 


5.53 


43 


8.932 


146.493 




6.25 


1.55 


1.23 


.17 




29.40 


5.20 


44 


8.897 


146.492 




14.37 


1.78 


1.43 






30.70 


5.04 


45 


9.057 


146.542 




3.75 


1.91 


1.60 






30.40 


4.02 


46 


9.062 


146.572 




9.00 


1.44 


1.12 






26.50 


4.57 


47 


8.965 


146.668 






1.35 


1.22 


.19 


.05 


29.90 


5.85 


48 


8.740 


147.532 






1.47 


1.22 


.18 


.05 


30.10 


5.74 


49 


8.727 


147.590 






1.48 


1.27 


.18 


.06 


29.60 


5.68 


50 


8.575 


147.778 






1.30 


1.25 


.16 


.05 


27.30 


5.98 


51 


9.100 


145.300 






1.52 


1.27 


.26 


.04 


26.20 


5.30 


52 


9.447 


145.555 






1.44 


1.14 


.22 


.05 


28.30 


5.75 


53 


9.657 


146.332 






1.33 


1.08 


.21 




26.20 


7.07 


54 


9.250 


146.350 


>50 




1.24 


.80 


.26 




22.00 


6.50 


55 


8.590 


146.300 


20-50 




1.50 


1.20 


.20 




27.00 


5.00 


56 


8.480 


147.250 


<20 




1.30 


1.15 


.25 




28.00 


5.00 


57 


9.503 


145.805 


, 




1.60 


1.30 






30.00 


6.00 


58 


9.457 


145.825 






1.50 


1.30 






30.60 


6.00 


59 


9.457 


145.828 






1.50 


1.30 






31.20 


5.30 


60 


9.457 


145.833 






1.50 


1.20 






32.30 


5.00 


61 


9.457 


145.838 






1.50 


1.30 






31.20 


5.40 


62 


9.457 


145.842 






1.30 


1.20 






30.00 


5.00 


63 


9.453 


145.842 






1.40 


1.20 






30.00 


5.00 


64 


9.457 


145.845 






1.30 


1.30 






29.00 


5.60 


65 


9.498 


145.828 






1.40 


1.10 






29.80 


6.00 


66 


9.508 


145.828 






1.40 


1.10 






29.40 


6.00 


67 


9.502 


145.828 






1.40 


1.10 






30.00 


6.00 


68 


9.523 


145.828 






1.60 


1.30 






30.50 


5.00 


69 


9.512 


145.828 






1.50 


1.30 






28.30 


5.30 


70 


9.517 


145.828 






1.50 


1.10 






30.30 


6.00 


71 


9.505 


145.850 






1.50 


1.10 






31.00 


6.00 


72 


9.518 


145.850 






1.70 


1.40 






33.30 


4.50 


73 


9.515 


145.850 






1.50 


1.30 






30.70 


5.50 


74 


9.522 


145.850 






1.60 


1.30 






29.00 


5.00 


75 


9.520 


145.855 






1.50 


1.20 






29.00 


5.50 


76 


9.458 


145.867 






1.50 


1.30 






31.20 


5.60 


77 


9.458 


145.870 






1.50 


1.30 






30.40 


5.80 


79 


9.458 


145.880 






1.50 


1.20 






31.60 


5.80 


80 


9.458 


145.885 






1.60 


1.30 






31.40 


5.70 


81 


9.375 


145.882 






1.40 


1.20 






31.00 


6.00 


82 


9.373 


145.885 






1.30 


.90 






30.00 


6.20 



See footnote at end of table. 



45 





TABLE B-2. 


- Subarea 


All — location, 


abundance , 


and analytical dat 


a — Continued 




Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysis, wt pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


83 


9.372 


145.890 






1.40 


1.20 






31.00 


6.00 


84 


9.372 


145.893 






1.50 


1.20 






30.60 


5.50 


85 


9.370 


145.902 






1.40 


1.10 






30.00 


6.00 


86 


9.370 


145.905 






1.40 


1.00 






26.90 


5.40 


87 


9.340 


145.905 






1.40 


1.10 






31.00 


6.20 


88 


9.340 


145.910 






1.40 


1.10 






30.00 


6.80 


89 


9.340 


145.913 






1.20 


.80 






28.40 


9.00 


90 


9.340 


145.918 






.80 


.60 






23.00 


14.00 


91 


9.278 


145.917 






1.40 


1.10 






31.60 


6.40 


92 


9.362 


145.922 






1.20 


.90 






30.00 


7.50 


93 


9.362 


145.925 






1.00 


.80 






26.00 


11.00 


94 


9.362 


145.928 






1.40 


1.00 






31.40 


6.00 


95 


9.362 


145.933 






1.30 


1.00 






26.00 


6.00 


96 


9.362 


145.940 






1.40 


1.00 






27.00 


6.00 


97 


9.335 


145.932 






1.10 


.70 






23.00 


10.00 


98 


9.333 


145.940 






1.00 


.60 






25.00 


10.00 


99 


9.347 


145.950 






.90 


.50 






24.00 


12.00 


100 


9.358 


145.950 






1.20 


.80 






27.00 


9.00 


101 


9.352 


145.950 






.90 


.70 






26.00 


10.30 


102 


9.365 


145.950 






1.20 


.90 






22.00 


8.00 


103 


9.362 


145.950 






1.20 


.80 






21.00 


7.00 


104 


9.318 


145.955 






1.00 


.80 






24.00 


10.00 


105 


9.280 


145.958 






1.50 


1.10 






24.00 


10.00 


106 


9.297 


145.958 






1.20 


.90 






23.00 


8.00 


107 


9.289 


145.958 






1.50 


1.10 






28.60 


7.00 


108 


9.315 


145.972 






.90 


.60 






25.00 


13.00 


109 


9.315 


145.977 






1.10 


.70 






28.00 


10.30 


110 


9.315 


145.982 






1.10 


.70 






27.00 


11.00 


111 


9.315 


145.985 






1.10 


.70 






26.00 


10.50 


112 


9.315 


145.985 






1.20 


.70 






26.00 


10.00 


113 


9.315 


145.998 






1.00 


.60 






24.70 


11.40 


114 


9.315 


146.000 






.90 


.50 






25.80 


12.00 


115 


9.315 


146.005 






.80 


.50 






26.40 


12.00 


116 


9.315 


146.008 






1.40 


1.20 






30.30 


5.70 


117 


9.328 


145.978 






1.00 


.70 






26.00 


11.00 


118 


9.337 


145.983 






1.30 


.90 






28.00 


8.00 


119 


9.308 


145.987 






1.30 


1.10 






25.00 


6.00 


120 


9.357 


146.015 






1.50 


1.30 






28.00 


5.50 


121 


9.265 


146.017 






1.50 


1.20 






30.00 


5.50 


122 


9.267 


146.022 






1.40 


1.10 






30.80 


5.40 


123 


9.272 


146.027 






1.40 


1.10 






31.00 


5.60 


124 


9.275 


146.032 






1.50 


1.30 






30.80 


5.00 


125 


9.278 


146.035 






1.50 


1.10 






30.50 




126 


9.280 


146.040 






1.40 


1.00 






29.50 


6.00 


127 


9.322 


146.018 






1.45 


1.20 






31.50 


5.50 


128 


9.315 


146.020 






1.50 


1.30 






27.50 


5.00 


129 


9.313 


146.023 






1.00 


.70 






24.80 


9.70 


130 


9.313 


146.028 






1.40 


1.00 






29.40 


8.00 


131 


9.313 


146.032 






1.30 


1.00 






27.00 


6.20 


132 


9.313 


146.043 






.90 


.50 






23.50 


13.00 



See footnote at end of table, 



46 



TABLE B-2. - Subarea All — location, abundance, and analytical data — Continued 



Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, * 
pet 


Abundance , 

kg/m 2 


Analysis , wt pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


133 


9.520 


146.035 






1.10 


1.00 






25.30 


4.30 


134 


9.268 


146.042 






1.40 


1.10 






27.00 


5.80 


135 


9.270 


146.043 






1.40 


1.10 






29.70 


5.40 


136 


9.273 


146.047 






1.40 


1.20 






28.00 


5.50 


137 


9.275 


146.050 






1.70 


1.00 






29.00 


7.00 


138 


9.278 


146.055 






1.30 


1.00 






27.80 




139 


9.282 


146.060 






1.30 


.90 






27.80 




140 


9.452 


146.043 






1.30 


1.10 






30.50 


6.00 


141 


9.523 


146.048 






1.00 


1.00 






28.00 


2.80 


142 


9.523 


146.053 






1.10 


1.00 






28.00 


4.20 


143 


9.523 


146.060 






1.10 


1.00 






26.40 


3.50 


144 


9.523 


146.062 






1.10 


.90 






27.30 


5.00 


145 


9.505 


146.048 






1.50 


1.10 






29.00 


5.70 


146 


9.515 


146.050 






1.30 


1.10 






25.00 


4.00 


147 


9.515 


146.060 






1.30 


1.20 






27.80 


4.80 


148 


9.515 


146.063 






1.30 


1.20 






26.40 


4.70 


149 


9.515 


146.067 






1.00 


.70 






25.00 


7.60 


150 


9.515 


146.070 






1.00 


.70 






25.60 


8.80 


151 


9.503 


146.062 






1.30 


1.00 






26.40 


4.80 


152 


9.503 


146.065 






1.00 


.90 






26.30 


7.00 


153 


9.503 


146.070 






1.00 


.90 






26.70 


7.00 


154 


9.503 


146.080 






1.00 


.80 






26.00 


9.70 


155 


9.297 


146.063 






1.00 


.80 






23.80 


11.40 


156 


9.358 


146.067 






1.40 


1.10 






31.00 


6.00 


157 


9.305 


146.073 






.90 


.60 






23.20 


10.30 


158 


9.308 


146.077 


- 




.90 


.50 






24.50 


13.00 


159 


9.312 


146.082 






.90 


.50 






25.30 


12.00 


160 


9.315 


146.085 






.90 


.60 






25.20 


12.00 


161 


9.290 


146.073 






1.00 


.90 






26.00 


7.00 


162 


9.342 


146.075 






1.30 


.90 






28.00 


8.40 


163 


9.322 


146.075 






.80 


.50 






27.00 


12.00 


164 


9.333 


146.075 






.80 


.50 






27.30 


11.70 


165 


9.332 


146.075 






.90 


.60 






26.30 


12.70 


166 


9.327 


146.075 






.90 


.50 






26.20 


13.00 


167 


9.270 


146.075 






1.00 


1.00 






26.00 


7.00 


168 


9.273 


146.075 






1.40 


1.00 






27.20 


6.50 


169 


9.265 


146.075 






1.20 


.90 






23.00 


7.40 


170 


9.262 


146.075 






1.60 


1.20 






27.80 


5.00 


171 


9.250 


146.075 






1.00 


.70 






24.40 


9.30 


172 


9.310 


146.088 






.85 


.50 






24.50 


13.30 


173 


9.480 


146.115 






1.30 


1.00 






28.00 


6.00 








8.78 
NC 


1.30 
0.25 


1.00 
0.25 


0.21 
0.05 


0.05 
0.01 


27.85 
2.63 


7.13 




Standard deviation. . . . 


2.57 








12 


139 


139 


15 


9 


139 


136 



NC Not calculated. 

1 Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 

NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available. 



47 





TABLE E 


-3. - Subarea AIII — locat 


ion, abundance, and analytical data 




Index 
No. 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysis, wt 


pet, dry basis 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


174 


8.542 


148.932 






1.38 


1.28 


0.17 


0.05 


30.70 


6.30 


175 


8.483 


149.417 


<20 




1.45 


1.35 


.20 




26.80 


5.90 


176 


8.250 


149.500 


20-50 




1.15 


.85 


.26 




22.00 


7.50 


177 


8.450 


149.783 


47.2 


8.30 














178 


8.417 


149.800 


>50 
















179 


8.200 


150.300 






1.25 


1.15 


.25 




25.00 


5.50 


180 


8.400 


150.283 






1.35 


1.25 


.20 




26.80 


6.90 


181 


8.450 


150.283 






1.45 


1.30 


.20 




27.60 


6.30 


182 


8.483 


150.317 


>50 
















183 


8.483 


150.400 


.7 


.20 














184 


8.453 


150.478 


<20 
















185 


7.750 


150.683 






1.44 


1.54 


.20 




26.67 


6.17 


186 


8.083 


150.683 


<20 
















187 


7.817 


150.758 


<20 
















188 


8.033 


150.733 






1.35 


1.40 


.20 




29.80 


6.40 


189 


8.150 


150.717 






1.30 


1.15 






26.50 


7.50 


190 


8.197 


150.738 


40.9 


7.50 














191 


8.475 


150.742 


>50 


13.70 


1.08 


.77 


.26 


.04 


23.93 


10.08 


192 


8.217 


150.767 


NOb 
















193 


8.133 


150.767 


<20 




.78 


.59 


.42 




20.81 


13.73 


194 


8.250 


150.800 


20-50 
















195 


8.458 


150.778 


<20 


.60 


1.08 


.78 


.25 




24.62 


10.29 


196 


8.503 


150.797 


20-50 


11.50 


1.45 


1.23 


.21 




27.01 


5.99 


197 


8.467 


150.800 






1.44 


1.45 


.18 




27.33 


4.92 


198 


8.400 


150.800 


2.4 


.60 














199 


8.500 


150.833 


>50 




.85 


.70 


.23 




20.40 


11.00 


200 


8.457 


150.837 


>50 


12.30 


1.38 


1.04 


.24 




27.23 


7.66 


201 


8.417 


150.817 


<20 




1.39 


1.35 


.21 




27.90 


6.50 


202 


8.417 


150.900 


<20 




1.42 


1.63 


.17 




29.14 


5.02 


203 


8.433 


150.917 


4.9 


1.20 














204 


8.273 


150.933 






1.47 


1.34 


.21 


.05 


28.75 


6.72 


205 


7.825 


150.950 


>50 
























6.21 
NC 


1.28 
0.21 


1.16 
0.30 


0.22 
0.06 


0.05 
0.01 


26.26 
2.70 


7.38 


Standard 


deviation. . . . 


2.30 


■ - 




Number of 




9 


19 


19 


18 


3 


19 


19 



NC Not calculated. 

NOb No nodules observed in photographs or no nodules recovered in samples. 

1 Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 



NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available. 



48 
























TABLE B 


-4. - Subarea AIV — location, abundance, and analytical data 




Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysis, wt pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


1 


9.900 


149.950 






0.75 


0.39 


0.20 




22.65 


14.22 


2 


9.717 


149.950 






1.08 


.65 


.21 




23.00 


7.7CI 


3 


9.683 


149.900 






1.27 


.82 


.26 




22.00 


7.7S 


4 


9.220 


149.817 






.90 


.66 


.28 




17.00 


10. 1C 


5 


8.783 


149.867 






.75 


.50 


.30 




22.00 


11.8C 


6 


8.833 


149.917 






1.02 


.65 


.28 




17.80 


7.9i 


7 


8.718 


150.235 




10.50 


.99 


.69 


.33 




23.35 


11.6* 


8 


8.685 


150.252 




5.50 


.89 


.54 


.36 




22.90 


11.7* 


9 


8.690 


150.250 




21.70 


.99 


.58 


.24 




20.90 


11.4* 


10 


8.695 


150.312 




11.40 


.90 


.62 


.31 




22.30 


11.6C 


11 


8.730 


150.312 




19.90 


.87 


.64 


.27 




21.50 


11.11 


12 


9.200 


150.375 






1.00 


.80 


.25 




17.00 


5.0C, 


13 


9.333 


150.583 






.55 


.43 


.17 




17.20 


14. 0C 


14 


9.450 


150.700 






.33 


.33 


.80 




4.50 


9.4C 


15 


8.817 


150.783 


45.6 


8.20 














16 


9.333 


150.807 




6.20 


.78 


.59 


.42 




20.80 


13.7: 


17 


9.345 


150.845 




4.70 


1.54 


1.10 


.22 




23.80 


8.1* 


18 


9.400 


150.832 




6.10 


1.30 


.86 


.24 




21.40 


10.2] 


19 


9.318 


150.840 




9.70 


1.33 


1.00 


.22 




24.90 


8.8; 


20 


9.450 


150.817 


46.9 


8.10 














21 


9.423 


150.845 


>50 
















22 


9.327 


150.845 


- 


.60 


1.20 


.83 


.26 




19.60 


6.7£ 


23 


9.355 


150.857 




.10 














24 


9.317 


150.863 


58.0 


8.80 














25 


9.317 


150.875 




10.20 


.86 


.59 


.32 




22.30 


11.4C 


26 


9.397 


150.880 




15.20 


.82 


.55 


.26 




20.90 


11.1: 


27 


9.500 


150.883 






.77 


.53 


.25 




15.67 


8.8C 


28 


9.533 


150.900 


<20 
















29 


9.517 


150.950 






.83 


.59 


.19 




15.80 


8.1f 


30 


9.917 


150.933 






.95 


.70 


.25 




23.60 


10.3C 


31 


9.883 


150.950 






1.25 


1.00 


.20 




24.40 


7.1C 


241 


10.000 


150.000 






.92 


.66 


.25 




19.00 


9.6C 










9.18 


0.96 


0.67 


0.28 




20.24 


9.9S 






Standard 


deviation. . . . 


NC 


0.26 


0.19 


0.12 




4.19 


2.3J 






Number of 




16 


26 


26 


26 





26 


It 


NC No 


t calculat 


ed. 












^Amoun 


t of seafl 


oor covered 


with nodules. 










NOTE.- 


-Blank ind 


icates no i 


nformation ava 


ilable. 






X 





























49 




TABLE 


B-5. - Subarea AV — location, abundance, and analytical data 




Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance, 
kg/m 2 


Analysis, wt pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


250 


8.308 


151.023 


NOb 
















252 


8.050 


151.400 


<20 




1.30 


1.20 


0.25 




24.00 


6.00 


253 


8.275 


151.122 


20-50 


8.10 


1.31 


1.09 


.24 




27.00 


7.70 


254 


8.302 


151.158 


<20 


.20 














255 


8.267 


151.180 


33.0 


5.90 














256 


8.267 


151.188 


<20 


1.70 


1.61 


1.64 


.18 




30.00 


4.73 


257 


8.293 


151.220 


20-50 


.70 


1.36 


1.33 


.20 




25.23 


5.82 


258 


8.238 


151.238 


20-50 


9.40 


1.34 


1.06 


.22 




27.30 


8.91 


259 


8.475 


151.152 


NPr 
















260 


8.467 


151.150 






1.19 


1.05 


.18 




25.40 


7.30 


261 


9.005 


151.182 




.10 














262 


9.027 


151.203 


6.5 


1.60 














263 


9.038 


151.187 


<20 


1.60 


1.53 


1.45 


.17 




25.13 


4.92 


264 


9.038 


151.190 


<20 
















265 


9.042 


151.177 


<20 


1.60 


1.62 


1.56 


.26 




30.40 


3.78 


266 


9.053 


151.183 




3.80 














267 


9.058 


151.185 


<20 


4.90 


1.46 


1.31 


.22 




24.22 


5.57 


268 


9.080 


151.157 


<20 


.70 














269 


9.080 


151.185 


<20 


7.60 


1.72 


1.55 


.27 




29.90 


4.25 


270 


9.065 


151.237 


<20 


3.60 


1.59 


1.49 


.29 




29.50 


4.66 


271 


9.100 


151.500 


<20 




1.30 


1.10 


.25 




19.00 


5.50 


272 


9.033 


151.567 






1.25 


1.06 


.15 




26.80 


5.30 


273 


8.400 


151.800 


NOb 
















274 


8.417 


151.883 






1.36 


1.18 


.18 




23.30 


4.81 


275 


9.367 


151.967 


<20 




1.28 


.09 


.17 




25.30 


4.25 


276 


9.450 


152.017 


>50 
















277 


9.383 


152.033 






1.30 


1.05 


.20 




26.80 


7.50 










3.43 
NC 


1.41 
0.16 


1.20 
0.36 


0.21 
0.04 




26.20 
2.96 


5.69 




Standard 


deviation. ... 


1.45 






Number of 




15 


16 


16 


16 





16 


16 



NC Not calculated. 

NOb No nodules observed in photographs or no nodules recovered in samples. 

NPr Nodules present, no additional information available. 

1 Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 



NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available. 



50 





TABLE B-6. - Subarea AVI— lo 


cation, abun 


dance, 


and analytical data 






Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, * 
pet 


Abundance, 
kg/m 2 


Analysis, wt pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


278 


8.033 


152.150 


20-50 
















279 


7.950 


152.250 


20-50 




1.20 


1.10 


0.25 




22.50 


7.00 


280 


7.970 


152.287 






1.24 


1.08 


.24 




23.01 


7.27 


281 


8.050 


152.300 


NOb 
















282 


8.133 


152.267 


>50 




.84 


.55 


.21 




19.45 


9.55 


283 


8.098 


152.603 






.96 


.72 


.22 




19.86 


9.24 


284 


7.945 


152.805 






1.35 


1.32 


.15 




26.10 


5.25 


293 


8.342 


152.952 


NOb 
















294 


8.321 


152.959 






1.11 


1.20 


.14 


0.04 


26.40 


5.74 


295 


8.314 


152.961 


NOb 
















296 


8.326 


152.967 


NOb 
















297 


8.305 


152.964 






.90 


1.03 


.15 


.04 


26.40 


6.47 


298 


8.296 


152.965 






1.08 


.93 


.18 


.04 


24.60 


7.94 


299 


8.281 


152.968 






1.01 


.99 


.16 


.03 


22.40 


6.56 


300 


8.272 


152.970 






1.20 


1.25 


.21 


.04 


24.41 


7.79 


301 


8.264 


152.972 






1.01 


.86 


.20 


.03 


24.00 


9.24 


302 


8.366 


152.986 


NOb 
















303 


8.363 


152.986 


NOb 
















304 


8.371 


152.988 


NOb 
















305 


8.380 


152.989 


NPr 
















306 


8.375 


152.989 






1.28 


1.65 


.13 


.04 


25.90 


5.44 


307 


8.390 


152.991 


NOb 
















308 


8.394 


152.992 






.90 


1.03 


.15 


.04 


26.40 


6.47 


309 


8.400 


153.000 


NPr 
















310 


8.285 


153.009 


NOb 
















311 


8.321 


153.009 


NOb 
















312 


8.347 


153.016 






1.02 


.99 


.18 


.03 


23.30 


7.49 


313 


8.382 


153.026 


NOb 
















314 


8.337 


153.027 


NOb 
















315 


8.326 


153.027 


NOb 
















316 


8.326 


153.027 


NOb 
















317 


8.328 


153.031 


NOb 
















318 


8.324 


153.035 


NOb 
















319 


8.332 


153.031 






1.05 


1.05 


.17 


.04 


25.70 


6.37 


320 


8.369 


153.032 






.94 


.90 


.17 


.03 


22.50 


7.59 


321 


8.319 


153.037 






.92 


.99 


.16 


.04 


24.40 


7.28 


322 


8.315 


153.040 






1.07 


1.09 


.16 


.04 


26.60 


6.93 


323 


8.351 


153.038 


















324 


8.381 


153.039 






1.12 


1.21 


.14 


.04 


25.90 


5.98 


325 


8.306 


153.047 






1.59 


1.44 


.19 


.03 


25.30 


5.77 


326 


8.380 


153.050 


NOb 
















327 


8.383 


153.056 


NOb 
















328 


8.381 


153.062 


NOb 
















329 


8.383 


153.069 


NOb 
















333 


7.885 


153.550 


<20 




1.45 


1.39 


.09 




26.70 


4.83 


334 


8.417 


153.450 


20-50 




1.49 


1.40 


.22 




23.40 


4.59 


340 


8.095 


153.915 






1.16 


1.15 


.15 


.05 


23.90 


7.75 










1.13 

0.20 

23 


1.10 

0.24 

23 


0.17 

0.04 

23 


0.04 

0.01 

16 


24.31 

2.05 

23 


6.89 




Standard 
Number of 




1.36 






23 



NOb No nodules observed in photographs or no nodules recovered in samples, 
NPr Nodules present, no additional information available. 
Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 



NOTE. — Blank, indicates no information available 



51 





TABLE 


B-7. - Study 


area A — location, abundance, 


and analytical 


data outside subareas 




Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analy 


sis, wt pet, dry basis 




No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


221 


11.933 


146.448 






1.31 


1.03 


0.23 


0.04 


26.70 


6.45 


222 


9.133 


146.817 






1.00 


.75 


.20 




19.60 


7.00 


223 


9.450 


147.300 


20-50 




.70 


.40 


.35 




20.00 


12.00 


224 


9.083 


148.750 






1.04 


.75 


.21 




21.60 


6.80 


225 


9.350 


148.733 


<20 


22.20 


1.35 


1.02 


.24 




26.80 


7.30 


226 


10.283 


148.700 


>50 




1.20 


.86 


.24 




27.10 


7.55 


in 


10.283 


148.750 






1.40 


1.05 


.19 




28.00 


6.50 


228 


7.400 


149.033 






1.45 


1.30 


.15 




29.60 


5.20 


229 


7.700 


149.050 


<20 
















230 


7.750 


149.100 


<20 




1.00 


.75 


.25 




22.00 


10.20 


231 


8.875 


149.100 


<20 
















232 


9.700 


149.250 


<20 
















233 


9.275 


149.400 






1.35 


1.25 


.25 




19.00 


5.00 


234 


9.650 


149.400 






1.28 


1.16 


.16 




26.10 


6.10 


235 


9.683 


149.517 


<20 
















236 


10.350 


149.450 


<20 




1.00 


.70 


.30 




21.50 


9.50 


237 


12.717 


149.067 






1.10 


.95 


.30 




24.00 


8.90 


242 


10.633 


150.033 


20-50 




.95 


.60 


.20 




18.80 


7.20 


243 


10.300 


150.500 


>50 




.50 


.40 


.40 




18.00 


11.00 


244 


12.650 


150.167 






.58 


.35 


.35 




21.07 


14.43 


245 


12.600 


150.233 


>50 




.75 


.45 


.40 




22.80 


14.10 


246 


7.567 


150.700 


NOb 
















247 


7.450 


150.767 


<20 




1.42 


1.68 


.15 




27.90 


5.58 


248 


7.417 


150.833 


NPr 
















249 


9.900 


151.042 


>50 
















251 


7.433 


151.783 






1.43 


1.39 


.15 




25.73 


4.60 


285 


8.663 


152.630 




.62 














286 


8.663 


152.630 




.12 














287 


8.663 


152.630 




.25 














288 


8.950 


152.867 






.66 


.61 


.22 




17.02 


8.84 


289 


8.950 


152.867 






1.33 


.41 


.78 




22.61 


10.94 


290 


9.983 


152.950 




5.62 














291 


9.983 


152.950 




6.25 














292 


9.983 


152.950 






1.53 


1.11 






29.40 


6.52 


330 


8.933 


153.083 


<20 




.95 


.80 


.20 




24.50 


8.50 


331 


9.900 


153.117 


<20 
















332 


7.350 


153.200 


<20 
















335 


9.700 


153.550 


<20 




1.00 


.60 


.35 




23.00 


13.80 


336 


9.733 


153.550 


<20 




.67 


.39 


.34 




24.10 


15.90 


337 


9.733 


153.600 


>50 




.84 


.52 


.34 




21.40 


12.64 


338 


9.717 


153.617 


>50 
















339 


9.617 


153.697 






1.37 


1.59 


.13 




25.45 


5.76 


341 


11.367 


153.617 




.25 


1.33 


1.12 


.12 




20.20 


5.00 


342 


11.367 


153.617 




.25 


1.33 


1.14 


.14 




21.80 


5.10 


343 


11.367 


153.617 




1.88 


1.38 


1.22 


.14 




25.30 


5.85 


344 


10.935 


153.307 


>50 


22.20 


.52 


.26 


.24 




19.80 


12.51 


345 


11.010 


153.333 


<20 


.40 


1.16 


1.02 


.16 




23.90 


5.86 


346 


10.968 


153.418 


<20 


4.00 


1.31 


1.08 


.15 




25.20 


5.60 


347 


11.007 


153.435 


<20 


1.80 


1.15 


1.08 


.10 




25.60 


5.75 


348 


10.947 


153.445 


>50 


10.80 


.75 


.44 


.24 




19.10 


11.10 


349 


11.005 


153.470 


20-50 


8.00 


.90 


.45 


.22 




18.80 


8.56 


350 


11.013 


153.478 


20-50 


7.00 














351 


10.977 


153.477 


20-50 


12.00 














352 


10.993 


153.480 


20-50 


6.40 


.73 


.49 


.15 




19.00 


9.72 


353 


10.860 


153.497 


>50 


14.00 


.78 


.50 


.26 




19.60 


11.94 


354 


11.110 


153.522 




1.80 






















5.45 
NC 


1.07 
0.30 


0.83 
0.37 


0.24 
0.12 


0.04 
NC 


22.95 
3.41 


8.56 




Standard d 




3.15 






Number of 




19 


38 


38 


37 


1 


38 


38 



NC Not calculated. 
NPr Nodules present, 
1 Amount of seafloor 



NOb No nodules observed 
no additional information 
covered with nodules. 
NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available 



in photographs 
available. 



or no nodules recovered in samples , 



52 







TABLE B-8. 


- Subarea BI — location, abundance, and analytical data 






'Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance, 
kg/m2 


Analysis, wt pet, dry basis 


No. 


Nl 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


523 


13.922 


139.772 






1.26 


1.26 


0.21 




30.00 


6.45 


524 


13.928 


139.780 






1.31 


1.39 


.19 




27.50 


3.95 


525 


13.767 


140.017 






1.16 


.94 


.14 




23.15 


6.65 


526 


13.750 


140.050 






1.20 


.85 


.21 




19.73 


5.40 


527 


13.887 


140.057 






1.42 


1.32 


.22 




30.40 


4.20 


528 


13.667 


140.067 






1.07 


.77 


.24 




22.20 


7.37 


529 


13.733 


140.083 






1.00 


.73 


.24 




17.00 


7.80 


530 


13.717 


140.100 






.97 


.68 


.21 




16.80 


6.30 


531 


13.717 


140.133 






1.00 


.64 


.16 




15.30 


4.60 


532 


13.700 


140.150 






1.32 


.90 


.44 




27.70 


5.77 


533 


13.700 


140.167 






1.31 


1.17 


.17 




26.80 


5.60 


534 


13.700 


140.200 






1.41 


1.22 


.20 




29.90 


5.50 


535 


13.683 


140.233 






1.40 


1.22 


.19 




28.50 


5.00 


536 


13.683 


140.283 






1.36 


1.00 


.43 




36.40 


5.17 


537 


13.683 


140.333 






1.35 


1.08 


.41 




28.90 


5.10 


538 


13.683 


140.333 






1.41 


1.14 


.14 




20.80 


6.40 


539 


13.683 


140.383 






1.63 


1.55 


.10 




31.70 


4.96 


540 


13.667 


140.433 






1.45 


1.46 


.10 




31.00 


4.58 


541 


13.650 


140.450 






.88 


.80 


.23 




20.20 


5.30 


542 


13.650 


140.467 






1.07 


.79 


.44 




26.30 


5.79 


543 


13.647 


140.470 






1.09 


1.06 


.21 




22.90 


4.93 


544 


13.617 


140.500 






.86 


.56 


.14 




18.20 


7.20 


545 


13.633 


140.500 






1.43 


1.20 


.22 




29.60 


5.11 


546 


13.617 


140.517 






.32 


.24 


.14 




7.50 


5.20 


547 


13.617 


140.533 






1.37 


1.10 


.23 




23.80 


5.00 


548 


13.600 


140.550 






.88 


.60 


.24 




18.10 


10.70 


549 


13.617 


140.550 






.77 


.62 


.15 




15.80 


6.50 


550 


13.600 


140.567 






.86 


.71 


.20 




15.50 


5.80 


551 


13.600 


140.583 






1.16 


.86 


.20 




23.60 


6.30 


552 


13.583 


140.600 






1.02 


.76 


.16 




16.30 


4.80 


553 


13.583 


140.617 






.77 


.45 


.24 




19.90 


4.84 


554 


13.567 


140.617 






1.30 


1.02 


.23 




27.60 


6.50 


555 


13.583 


140.617 


' 




1.16 


.88 


.18 




21.40 


7.80 


556 


13.569 


140.633 






.89 


.48 


.52 




22.00 


9.24 


557 


13.567 


140.633 






1.02 


.77 


.22 




21.10 


7.60 


558 


13.567 


140.650 






1.58 


1.08 


.18 




20.80 


9.20 


559 


13.550 


140.667 






1.21 


.74 


.43 




25.70 


5.58 


560 


13.550 


140.667 






1.02 


.82 


.23 




20.20 


5.40 


561 


13.550 


140.683 






1.30 


1.08 


.12 




25.70 


5.16 


562 


13.550 


140.683 






1.04 


.56 


.44 




23.60 


6.98 


563 


13.517 


140.717 






.97 


.83 


.16 




19.20 


5.90 


564 


13.533 


140.717 






1.24 


.89 


.16 




21.30 


5.45 


565 


13.500 


140.717 






1.02 


.64 


.18 




14.60 


5.30 


566 


13.567 


140.717 






1.06 


.87 


.24 




19.10 


5.60 


567 


13.483 


140.733 






.92 


.58 


.18 




14.30 


5.20 


568 


13.467 


140.733 






.94 


.61 


.21 




19.40 


6.75 


569 


13.400 


140.750 






.94 


.64 


.28 




18.30 


7.40 


570 


13.433 


140.750 






.90 


.64 


.18 




18.40 


7.50 


571 


13.417 


140.750 






.95 


.72 


.22 




18.10 


6.10 


572 


13.400 


140.767 






.97 


.63 


.27 




18.50 


9.90 


573 


13.483 


140.750 






1.04 


.49 


.46 




22.80 


6.63 


574 


13.450 


140.750 






.90 


.52 


.22 




19.20 


6.29 


575 


13.450 


140.750 






.86 


.61 


.23 




16.40 


6.00 


576 


13.483 


140.750 






1.33 


.95 


.24 




24.20 


6.00 


577 


13.467 


140.750 






1.07 


.81 


.21 




22.10 


5.35 


578 


13.467 


140.750 






.67 


.52 


.13 




12.90 


5.50 


579 


13.233 


140.833 






.61 


.29 


.42 




27.60 


5.11 








1.10 

0.25 

57 


0.84 

0.29 

57 


0.23 

0.10 

57 




22.03 

5.54 

57 


6.09 




Standard d 
Number of 




1.38 






56 



'Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 

NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available. 



53 





TABLE 


B-9. - Subarea BII — location, abundance, 


and analyti 


.cal data 




Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysis 


, wt pet , dry bas 


is 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


580 


13.160 


141.008 






0.57 


0.39 


0.20 




22.65 


12.70 


581 


13.003 


141.213 






1.46 


1.20 


.26 




28.80 


4.75 


582 


12.850 


141.583 






1.00 


.73 


.12 




16.80 


5.80 


583 


12.833 


141.583 






.92 


.51 


.30 




20.90 


8.38 


584 


12.850 


141.617 






.94 


.64 


.28 




17.90 


7.40 


585 


12.850 


141.617 






1.12 


.83 


.24 






6.61 


586 


12.833 


141.617 






1.25 


.96 


.21 




23.80 


5.40 


587 


12.817 


141.633 






1.36 


1.07 


.20 




27.80 


4.96 


588 


12.817 


141.667 






1.33 


1.05 


.38 




28.70 


5.60 


589 


12.817 


141.667 






1.43 


1.11 


.22 




30.50 


4.84 


590 


12.817 


141.683 






1.51 


1.16 


.23 




32.00 


5.50 


591 


12.800 


141.700 






1.39 


1.17 


.21 




30.20 


4.80 


592 


12.800 


141.717 






1.63 


1.29 


.18 




24.80 


7.70 


593 


12.800 


141.717 






1.43 


1.08 


.19 




30.70 


4.19 


594 


12.783 


141.733 






1.14 


.91 


.26 




23.40 


5.40 


595 


12.783 


141.733 






1.39 


1.06 


.20 




30.50 


4.68 


596 


12.767 


141.750 






.88 


.57 


.18 




18.80 


6.35 


597 


12.767 


141.750 






1.39 


1.22 


.19 




29.20 


6.16 


598 


12.767 


141.767 






1.10 


.79 


.16 




23.60 


6.80 


599 


12.750 


141.783 






1.24 


.92 


.25 




22.60 


5.70 


600 


12.683 


141.783 






1.03 


.78 


.24 




19.80 


5.90 


601 


12.733 


141.800 






.97 


.69 


.24 




18.90 


11.90 


602 


12.733 


141.817 






1.32 


1.07 


.14 




24.70 


5.96 


603 


12.717 


141.842 






1.43 


1.26 


.13 




29.10 


6.24 


604 


12.717 


141.850 






.84 


.71 


.29 




18.50 


5.50 


605 


12.717 


141.850 






1.37 


1.35 


.20 




21.50 


4.70 


606 


12.700 


141.883 






1.23 


.95 


.22 




21.80 


5.50 


607 


12.667 


141.900 






1.18 


.72 


.22 




24.30 


5.82 


608 


12.667 


141.917 






.86 


.61 


.24 




14.90 


4.80 


609 


12.667 


141.933 






1.21 


.92 


.27 




25.20 


8.10 


610 


12.650 


141.950 






1.18 


.95 


.23 




26.00 


6.20 


611 


12.633 


141.967 






.93 


.52 


.27 




19.40 


9.30 


612 


12.633 


142.000 






1.48 


1.33 


.12 




30.60 


5.22 


613 


12.617 


142.017 






.98 


.71 


.22 




18.20 


5.40 


614 


12.600 


142.058 






1.30 


1.05 


.09 




26.40 


6.60 


615 


12.600 


142.067 






1.02 


.81 


.25 




20.40 


5.80 


616 


12.667 


142.068 






.83 


.58 


.25 




23.80 


6.30 


617 


12.583 


142.150 






1.25 


1.21 


.21 


0.06 


31.30 


4.91 








1.18 

0.24 

38 


0.92 

0.26 

38 


0.23 

0.07 

38 


0.06 

NC 

1 


24.28 

4.76 

37 


6.26 




Standard 
Number o 




1.82 






38 



NC Not calculated. 

1 Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 



NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available, 



54 



TABLE B-10. - Subarea Bill — location, abundance, and analytical data 



Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, * 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysi 


s, wt pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


404 


10.000 


140.000 






1.34 


1.16 


0.24 


0.06 


29.90 


5.50 


407 


11.810 


137.405 


>50 


16.00 


1.68 


1.25 


.23 




29.20 


4.29 


408 


11.847 


137.445 


>50 


10.00 


1.66 


1.20 


.25 




29.50 


4.68 


409 


11.803 


137.438 


>50 


16.30 


1.66 


1.20 


.24 




29.10 


4.59 


410 


11.810 


137.472 


<20 


.80 


1.63 


1.47 


.20 




29.20 


3.57 


411 


12.183 


137.683 




11.30 


1.54 


1.24 


.22 




29.40 


5.23 


412 


12.160 


137.707 


>50 


15.60 


1.56 


1.20 


.21 




27.30 


4.74 


413 


12.173 


137.735 




1.10 


1.60 


1.40 


.30 




26.90 


4.64 


414 


12.200 


137.745 


<20 


.20 


1.57 


1.44 


.18 




26.30 


3.79 


415 


12.148 


137.743 


>50 


18.70 


1.65 


1.21 


.22 




29.10 


5.03 


416 


12.142 


137.767 


<20 


2.60 


1.46 


1.36 


.20 




26.50 


4.93 


417 


11.738 


138.353 


<20 


.05 


1.51 


1.45 






28.50 


3.76 


418 


11.732 


138.370 


<20 


4.00 


1.50 


1.50 


.23 




27.40 


5.04 


419 


11.722 


138.373 


<20 


.04 


1.70 


1.81 






27.50 


4.53 


420 


11.272 


139.070 


<20 


1.90 


1.61 


1.20 


.20 




30.20 


4.51 


421 


11.248 


139.090 


<20 


.09 


1.29 


1.50 






29.40 


3.59 


422 


11.228 


139.165 


<20 


.03 


1.27 


1.45 






28.10 


3.73 


423 


11.608 


139.128 


<20 


4.50 


.91 


1.53 






21.60 


4.82 


424 


11.728 


139.137 


<20 


.04 


1.40 


1.48 






28.60 


3.68 


425 


11.718 


139.148 


<20 


.03 


1.32 


1.46 






26.60 


3.33 


426 


11.707 


139.180 


20-50 


9.50 


1.44 


1.14 


.18 




28.60 


4.90 


427 


11.693 


139.183 


20-50 


.90 


1.91 


1.54 


.20 




27.80 


4.32 


428 


10.750 


139.400 






1.36 


.68 


.30 




20.80 


7.40 


429 


10.672 


139.953 






1.55 


1.26 


.23 




30.70 


5.22 


430 


12.145 


137.757 


37.1 


9.04 














431 


11.257 


139.015 




2.34 














432 


11.247 


139.068 


<20 


3.00 














433 


10.650 


139.100 


20-50 
















434 


10.600 


139.425 


<20 
















435 


11.703 


138.390 


<20 
















436 


11.675 


138.432 


<20 
















437 


11.258 


139.055 


NOb 
















438 


11.008 


139.988 




15.00 


1.74 


1.25 






32.10 


3.31 


439 


11.017 


139.967 


<20 




1.13 


.73 


.24 




22.10 


7.50 


440 


11.057 


139.997 






1.58 


1.10 


.18 




30.10 


5.20 


441 


11.067 


139.997 


<20 


5.35 


1.52 


1.40 


.24 




28.30 


4.40 


442 


11.067 


139.998 


<20 


3.95 














443 


11.083 


140.000 




5.62 


1.50 


1.29 






27.40 


3.23 


444 


11.117 


140.000 






1.52 


1.40 


.24 




28.70 


4.90 


445 


11.048 


140.047 


<20 


.20 


1.71 


1.49 


.19 




30.80 


4.00 


446 


11.048 


140.045 


<20 


.31 














447 


11.012 


140.067 






1.37 


1.25 


.21 




24.70 


4.30 


448 


11.043 


140.070 






1.19 


.86 


.30 




21.50 


6.08 


449 


11.037 


140.078 






1.35 


1.11 


.27 




28.40 


5.85 


450 


11.012 


140.080 






1.41 


1.29 


.19 




29.40 


4.50 


451 


11.095 


140.082 




4.32 


1.72 


1.34 


.25 




33.30 


4.75 


452 


11.093 


140.082 




.73 


1.85 


1.36 


.29 




30.70 


4.60 


453 


11.035 


140.088 






1.03 


.96 


.26 




25.30 


6.28 


454 


11.035 


140.090 






1.46 


1.12 


.26 




25.90 


5.88 


455 


11.010 


140.092 


<20 


4.27 


1.12 


1.15 


.17 




22.80 


6.00 



See footnote at end of table. 



55 



TABLE B-10. - Subarea Bill — location, abundance, and analytical data — Continued 



Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, * 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysi 


s, wt pet, dry bas 


is 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


456 


11.008 


140.092 


<20 


0.10 














457 


11.010 


140.088 






1.40 


1.37 


0.19 




28.00 


4.20 


458 


11.012 


140.088 






1.46 


1.43 


.21 




27.10 


4.20 


459 


11.013 


140.088 






1.07 


.98 


.16 




20.00 


4.20 


460 


11.012 


140.088 






1.10 


1.23 


.32 




19.20 


5.10 


461 


10.982 


140.092 






1.43 


1.29 


.27 




28.50 


4.62 


462 


10.980 


140.092 






1.41 


1.03 


.34 




26.50 


6.64 


463 


11.010 


140.095 






1.43 


1.28 


.26 




24.80 


5.55 


464 


11.013 


140.095 






1.20 


1.62 


.48 




21.70 


6.50 


465 


11.008 


140.095 






1.44 


1.25 


.25 




28.30 


5.30 


466 


10.970 


140.097 






1.40 


1.29 


.20 




29.30 


4.55 


467 


10.967 


140.097 






1.63 


1.42 


.19 




28.80 


3.83 


468 


11.025 


140.102 


<20 


.62 


1.49 


1.50 


.21 




30.80 


4.30 


469 


11.013 


140.105 






1.56 


1.17 


.26 




27.50 


5.43 


470 


11.017 


140.115 






1.49 


1.12 


.30 




27.00 


5.95 


471 


11.015 


140.118 






1.59 


1.29 


.21 




27.70 


4.72 


472 


11.015 


140.118 






1.55 


1.23 


.29 




28.60 


5.34 


473 


10.927 


140.135 






1.64 


1.29 


.22 




28.80 


4.87 


474 


10.927 


140.135 






1.75 


1.33 


.27 




29.60 


5.40 


475 


10.965 


140.148 






1.63 


1.26 


.25 




28.80 


5.19 


476 


10.950 


140.158 






1.03 


.63 


.50 




23.40 


10.45 


477 


10.990 


140.182 


<20 


.77 


1.87 


1.22 


.36 




30.60 


5.75 


479 


10.990 


140.193 


20-50 


5.17 


1.63 


.97 


.38 




27.80 


7.70 


480 


10.990 


140.193 


20-50 


5.61 


1.55 


.91 


.38 




26.50 


7.64 


481 


11.073 


139.982 




9.09 














482 


11.050 


139.983 




6.87 














483 


11.010 


139.990 




5.62 














484 


11.073 


139.992 




4.65 














485 


11.053 


139.992 




9.27 














486 


11.023 


139.998 




2.24 














487 


11.093 


139.995 




5.81 














488 


11.047 


140.000 




2.17 














489 


11.067 


140.000 


NOb 
















490 


11.050 


140.000 




4.25 














491 


11.050 


140.000 




12.12 


1.47 


1.37 


.16 




30.30 


4.00 


492 


11.023 


140.000 




2.20 














493 


10.950 


140.000 




6.37 














494 


10.917 


140.000 




.12 














495 


11.100 


140.017 




2.00 














496 


11.100 


140.017 




.60 


1.45 


1.40 


.17 




26.40 


4.70 


497 


11.100 


140.017 




1.12 


1.35 


.93 






22.90 


9.95 


498 


11.067 


140.017 




12.75 


1.44 


1.07 


.20 




30.20 


5.00 


499 


11.075 


140.002 




4.30 














500 


11.065 


140.002 




4.90 














501 


11.055 


140.002 




3.70 














502 


11.040 


140.003 




4.80 














503 


11.022 


140.004 




6.40 














504 


11.028 


140.004 




3.90 














505 


11.043 


140.012 




5.20 














506 


11.042 


140.022 




7.30 















See footnote at end of table. 



56 



TABLE B-10. - Subarea Bill — location, abundance, and analytical data — Continued 



Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysis, wt 


pet, 


dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


507 


11.044 


140.038 




6.00 














508 


11.047 


140.060 




6.20 














509 


11.018 


140.083 




1.00 














510 


11.035 


140.116 




4.50 


* 












511 


11.034 


140.146 




8.10 














512 


10.983 


140.163 




6.90 














513 


9.217 


139.700 






1.28 


.98 


0.20 




22.70 


5.40 


514 


9.100 


139.750 






1.32 


1.14 


.38 




22.80 


6.65 


515 


8.850 


139.833 






1.41 


1.35 


.25 




28.90 


5.42 


516 


9.000 


139.850 






1.36 


1.17 


.21 




29.80 


4.50 


517 


8.783 


139.883 






1.28 


1.32 


.20 






11.60 


518 


8.783 


139.883 






.94 


.94 


.26 




16.80 


6.70 


519 


8.950 


139.883 






1.47 


1.46 


.20 


0.07 


22.90 


5.04 


520 


8.833 


140.300 






1.00 


.45 


.12 




30.10 


1.78 








5.27 
NC 


1.45 
0.21 


1.24 
0.22 


0.25 
0.07 


0.07 
NC 


27.20 
2.98 


5.18 




Standard deviation.... 


1.37 








74 


75 


75 


75 


1 


74 


75 



NC Not calculated. 

NOb No nodules observed in photographs or no nodules recovered in samples. 

1 Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 



NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available. 

TABLE B-ll. - Study area B — location, abundance, and analytical data outside subareas 



Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysi 


s , wt 


pet, 


dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


400 


8.983 


137.683 






0.11 


0.11 


0.05 




2.50 


8.20 


401 


9.950 


137.783 






1.54 


1.15 


.19 


0.08 


33.00 


4.08 


402 


9.943 


137.802 






1.54 


1.15 


.18 


.08 


24.24 


4.97 


403 


8.350 


138.783 






.62 


.47 


.14 








405 


13.667 


137.500 




2.93 














406 


11.717 


142.800 




4.30 














521 


13.033 


139.083 






1.73 


1.51 


.38 




28.90 




522 


13.033 


139.083 






1.24 


1.09 


.34 




24.30 


6.50 


618 


12.283 


140.430 






1.56 


1.22 


.19 




29.90 


4.43 


619 


10.983 


142.617 






1.23 


.96 


.31 


.03 


17.00 


6.40 


620 


10.012 


143.312 




1.25 


1.51 


1.34 






29.20 


4.53 


621 


10.010 


143.317 




18.12 


1.52 


1.12 


.25 




31.80 


4.60 


622 


10.008 


143.320 




21.25 


1.49 


1.07 


.18 




30.10 


5.10 










9.57 
NC 


1.28 
0.49 


1.02 
0.40 


0.22 
0.10 


0.06 
0.03 


25.09 
9.22 


5.42 




Standard 


deviation. . . . 


1.34 






Number of 




5 


11 


11 


10 


3 


10 


9 



NC Not calculated. 

1 Amount of seafloor covered with nodules 



NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available. 























57 




TABLE B-12. - Subarea CI — location, abundance, 


and analytical data 




Index 
No. 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, * 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysi 


s, wt 


pet, dry basis 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


662 


16.008 


124.993 


NPr 
















663 


14.983 


125.000 




13.88 


1.32 


1.26 


0.23 




28.20 


5.62 


664 


15.067 


125.000 




20.00 


1.41 


1.21 


.28 


0.07 


28.80 


6.75 


665 


14.967 


125.017 






1.40 


1.17 


.22 




29.90 


5.60 


666 


16.033 


125.017 






1.46 


1.13 


.26 


.07 


28.40 


7.15 


667 


15.255 


125.025 


>50 


13.70 














668 


14.933 


125.067 




12.50 


1.38 


1.05 


.30 


.07 


28.60 


7.00 


669 


15.033 


125.067 




15.62 


1.43 


1.15 


.29 


.07 


28.20 


7.05 


670 


15.000 


125.067 




27.75 


1.42 


1.19 


.29 


.07 


27.70 


7.13 


671 


15.067 


125.083 


NPr 
















680 


15.110 


125.932 


NPr 
















681 


15.230 


125.943 


>50 


10.00 














682 


14.765 


125.977 


NPr 
















683 


15.262 


126.000 






1.37 


1.14 


.26 


.06 


29.09 


5.99 


684 


14.257 


126.023 






1.38 


1.20 


.26 


.06 


27.30 


6.26 


685 


15.243 


126.028 


>50 


15.00 














686 


15.242 


126.047 


>50 


29.00 














687 


15.135 


126.063 


>50 


17.00 














688 


15.242 


126.065 


20-50 


15.00 














689 


15.130 


126.078 


>50 


16.00 














692 


15.135 


126.092 


>50 


13.00 














693 


15.140 


126.105 


20-50 


11.00 














695 


15.192 


126.112 


NPr 
















699 


15.778 


126.187 


NPr 
















702 


14.908 


126.622 






.58 


.36 


.15 




14.40 


11.06 


703 


14.045 


126.663 


NOb 
















704 


16.012 


126.772 






1.20 


.78 






25.10 


6.92 


710 


15.000 


125.000 






1.22 


1.31 


.15 




29.70 


5.25 


711 


14.967 


125.000 






1.38 


1.27 


.25 




28.60 


6.30 


712 


14.967 


125.000 






1.40 


1.17 


.22 




29.90 


5.60 


713 


15.033 


125.083 






1.45 


1.33 


.22 




27.90 


6.35 


735 


15.104 


125.950 


>50 


11.80 














736 


15.252 


125.987 


20-50 


4.60 














737 


15.220 


125.920 


>50 


9.12 














738 


15.241 


126.040 


>50 


15.20 














739 


15.137 


126.090 


>50 


12.20 














740 


15.231 


125.974 




4.90 


1.34 


1.21 


.24 




28.40 


6.16 


741 


15.242 


126.043 




8.84 


1.37 


1.10 


.28 




27.50 


6.68 


742 


15.257 


125.988 




1.79 


1.36 


1.31 


.24 




28.20 


5.68 


743 


15.243 


126.026 




6.51 


1.29 


.83 


.28 




22.60 


7.54 


744 


15.217 


125.932 




8.93 


1.33 


.95 


.28 




26.10 


7.02 


745 


15.182 


125.893 




12.35 


1.39 


1.10 


.36 




28.10 


6.49 


746 


15.205 


125.868 




9.95 


1.19 


.84 


.31 




26.20 


8.09 


747 


15.207 


125.953 




8.48 


1.26 


.80 


.30 




26.20 


8.16 


748 


15.188 


126.025 






1.34 


1.02 


.22 




26.30 


6.25 



See footnote at end of table, 



58 



TABLE B-12. - Subarea CI — location, abundance, and analytical data — Continued 



Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysi 


s, wt pet, dry bas. 


Ls 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


749 


15.190 


126.037 




6.49 


1.18 


0.97 


0.24 




27.50 


6.37 


750 


15.195 


126.065 




13.81 


1.26 


1.06 


.29 




27.20 


6.06 


751 


15.193 


126.098 




11.44 


1.26 


.81 


.29 




27.20 


6.06 


752 


15.137 


126.107 




10.21 


1.33 


.89 


.27 




26.60 


6.92 


753 


15.137 


126.062 




15.23 


1.32 


.92 


.28 




27.00 


6.32 


754 


15.140 


126.045 




8.81 


1.31 


.87 


.24 




25.70 


6.63 


755 


15.132 


125.990 




9.24 


1.23 


.60 


.36 




23.80 


9.51 


756 


15.138 


125.955 




16.84 


.95 


.47 


.31 




15.70 


8.87 


757 


15.105 


125.957 




10.29 


1.04 


.46 


.34 




23.40 


10.34 


758 


15.140 


126.015 






1.30 


.94 


.23 




25.10 


6.17 


759 


15.098 


126.035 




16.06 


1.17 


.73 


.24 




19.90 


6.27 


760 


15.108 


126.047 




12.15 


1.26 


.93 


.26 




26.50 


6.15 


761 


15.000 


125..433 






1.00 


.82 


.38 




22.20 


9.70 


762 


15.067 


125.000 




20.00 


1.54 


1.41 


.26 




31.10 


6.29 


763 


14.983 


125.000 




15.00 


1.46 


1.40 






29.20 


5.64 


764 


14.967 


125.000 




11.88 


1.53 


1.36 


.26 




29.40 


6.08 


765 


14.933 


125.067 




15.00 


1.41 


1.09 


.27 




29.90 


6.59 


766 


15.033 


125.067 




17.50 


1.49 


1.21 


.27 




29.70 


6.76 


767 


15.050 


125.083 






1.43 


1.20 


.25 




29.50 


5.78 


768 


15.033 


125.083 






1.51 


1.26 


.24 




30.60 


5.29 


769 


15.000 


125.000 






1.66 


1.09 


.24 




25.00 


6.22 


770 


15.760 


126.008 






1.19 


1.08 






26.50 


5.60 


771 


15.245 


126.535 






1.41 


1.09 


.25 




25.70 


6.47 


772 


15.778 


126.187 






1.51 


1.26 


.27 




28.80 


5.84 


773 


15.297 


125.922 




9.80 


1.38 


.99 


.32 




27.30 


8.30 


774 


15.297 


125.473 




2.60 


1.43 


.98 


.29 




27.20 


8.09 


775 


15.343 


125.447 




7.70 


1.33 


1.21 


.30 




26.30 


6.30 


776 


14.217 


125.487 






1.46 


1.16 


.19 




28.10 


5.50 


777 


15.132 


125.132 






1.21 


.95 


.18 




25.20 


7.82 


778 


15.043 


125.138 






1.39 


1.08 


.23 




29.80 


7.47 


779 


15.150 


125.142 






1.38 


1.07 


.22 




31.10 


7.21 


780 


15.148 


125.162 






1.04 


.56 


.37 




26.00 


12.80 


781 


15.100 


125.167 






1.17 


.84 


.21 




25.10 


7.58 


782 


15.000 


125.067 




28.75 


1.45 


1.19 


.25 




31.10 


6.60 


783 


15.778 


126.187 






1.50 


1.36 


.26 




26.60 


5.96 


784 


15.233 


126.500 






1.51 


1.05 


.27 




27.20 


6.86 


785 


16.025 


125.672 




9.21 














786 


16.083 


124.967 




4.25 














787 


14.242 


124.975 






1.41 


1.12 


.28 




26.50 


6.75 


788 


16.050 


124.983 




3.50 


1.02 


.76 






20.60 


7.75 


789 


16.017 


124.983 




1.88 


1.58 


1.17 






28.20 


6.15 


790 


15.033 


125.000 




1.25 














791 


15.255 


125.025 




11.50 














792 


14.967 


125.067 




.62 














793 


15.067 


125.083 






1.30 


1.24 


.23 




23.20 


5.95 



See footnote at end of table, 



59 



TABLE B-12. - Subarea CI — location, abundance, and analytical data — Continued 



Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, * 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysi 


s, wt 


pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


794 
795 
797 
798 
799 

800 
801 


15.340 
15.327 
15.758 
15.275 
15.273 

15.277 
14.292 


125.902 
125.907 
126.167 
125.523 
126.867 

126.153 
126.257 


<20 
<20 


5.47 
10.94 
14.11 

8.88 
14.67 




















11.67 
NC 
59 


1.33 

0.17 

64 


1.04 

0.23 

64 


0.26 

0.04 

60 


0.07 

0.00 

7 


26.79 
3.23 

64 


6.91 




Standard deviation. . . . 


1.40 
64 



NC Not calculated. 

NOb No nodules observed in photographs or no nodules recovered in samples. 

NPr Nodules present, no additional information available. 

1 Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 



NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available. 

TABLE B-13. - Subarea CII — location, abundance, and analytical data 



Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, * 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysi 


s, wt 


pet, 


dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


650 


14.546 


117.270 






1.40 


0.92 


0.17 




28.30 


9.60 


651 


14.557 


117.303 






1.26 


.95 


.10 




27.30 


9.40 


652 


14.557 


117.303 






1.45 


.96 


.19 




28.20 


8.40 


653 


14.533 


117.320 






1.23 


.87 


.26 




24.60 


10.40 


654 


14.530 


117.327 






1.40 


.91 


.19 




26.60 


8.70 


655 


14.527 


117.353 






1.51 


.93 


.17 




29.20 


8.30 


656 


14.612 


117.360 






1.37 


1.01 


.14 




29.60 


7.20 


706 


14.438 


117.152 






1.41 


1.16 


.16 




28.90 


6.63 


707 


14.207 


118.875 






1.18 


.99 


.21 




23.70 


7.26 


715 


14.970 


116.228 






1.42 


.90 


.11 


0.06 


31.00 


6.66 


718 


14.767 


116.933 


<20 




1.43 


.97 


.14 




28.50 


7.20 


719 


14.433 


117.200 






1.89 


1.06 


.08 


.08 


26.80 


10.30 


720 


14.530 


117.258 


NPr 
















721 


14.553 


117.287 






1.45 


1.02 


.20 


.08 


29.80 


8.00 


722 


14.577 


117.310 






1.52 


1.02 


.17 


.06 


28.50 


8.00 


723 


14.587 


117.337 






1.14 


.72 


.18 


.06 


24.80 


10.85 


724 


14.573 


117.367 


NPr 
















727 


14.585 


118.555 






1.24 


.90 


.18 


.06 


26.90 


8.80 










1.39 

0.18 

16 


0.96 

0.10 

16 


0.17 

0.04 

16 


0.07 

0.01 

6 


27.67 

2.02 

16 


8.48 




Standard 
Number of 




1.34 






16 



NPr Nodules present, no additional information available. 
* Amount of seafloor covered with nodules. 



NOTE. — Blank indicates no information available. 



60 
























TABLE B-14. - Study area C — location, abundance 


, and 


analytical data 






outside subareas 












Index 


North 
latitude 


West 
longitude 


Population, 1 
pet 


Abundance , 
kg/m 2 


Analysis 


, wt pet, dry basis 


No. 


Ni 


Cu 


Co 


Mo 


Mn 


Fe 


657 


15.093 


120.748 






1.26 


1.13 


0.18 




27.60 


6.9C 


658 


14.585 


121.062 






1.43 


1.01 


.21 




28.80 


6.9C 


659 


14.603 


121.032 






1.32 


1.03 


.22 




27.30 


6.5C 


660 


14.247 


123.703 






1.39 


1.19 


.23 




28.10 


6.3C 


661 


14.917 


124.200 






1.22 


1.39 


.35 


0.04 


22.50 


7.9: 


672 


13.052 


125.480 






.98 


1.03 


.21 


.04 


25.00 


4.35 


673 


12.327 


125.500 


NPr 
















674 


12.323 


125.500 




9.25 


1.40 


1.15 


.13 


.08 


29.20 


6.43 


675 


12.342 


125.500 


NPr 
















676 


12.337 


125.502 


NPr 
















677 


12.330 


125.507 


NPr 
















678 


12.327 


125.507 


NPr 
















679 


16.583 


125.583 


20-50 




1.16 


.72 


.30 




22.00 


8.6C 


690 


13.683 


126.083 


NPr 
















691 


13.680 


126.083 


NPr 
















694 


13.755 


126.112 






1.37 


.95 






28.10 


7.26 


696 


13.757 


126.118 






1.41 


1.20 






29.10 


5.88 


697 


13.760 


126.118 


NPr 
















698 


13.762 


126.123 


NPr 
















700 


13.780 


126.228 


20-50 
















701 


13.773 


126.228 


20-50 
















705 


13.257 


126.800 




14.11 


1.21 


1.01 


.20 


.06 


22.80 


6.08 


708 


13.905 


120.813 






1.40 


1.16 


.27 




28.20 


7.06 


709 


12.530 


122.458 






1.29 


1.39 


.19 




29.80 


5.20 


714 


12.275 


120.158 






.62 


.42 


.42 




22.00 


19.80 


716 


13.673 


122.307 






1.11 


1.05 


.25 


.05 


22.70 


7.65 


717 


13.765 


116.630 


















725 


11.233 


117.483 




10.66 


1.46 


1.23 






31.70 


6.39 


726 


13.450 


118.417 






.99 


1.10 


.55 




31.50 


4.20 


728 


11.427 


118.757 


NPr 
















729 


14.478 


119.318 


20-50 


16.40 














730 


14.837 


119.663 


















731 


13.500 


119.700 


















732 


14.835 


120.142 


















733 


12.330 


122.288 






1.40 


1.45 


.15 




34.90 


4.32 


734 


12.298 


122.418 






1.08 


1.06 


.20 




25.80 


4.90 


796 


13.750 


126.183 


<20 






















12.61 
NC 


1.24 
0.21 


1.09 
0.23 


0.25 
0.11 


0.05 
0.02 


27.22 
3.65 


6.98 
3.34 




Standard deviation. . . 




Number of samples.... 


4 


19 


19 


16 


5 


19 


19 


NC N< 


3t calculated. 












NPr ] 


Nodules present, no additional ii 


^formation a 


ivailab 


tie. 






^Amoui 


at of seafloor covered with nodu 


les. 










NOTE.- 


—Blank ii 


idicates n< 


3 information 


available. 








V 










f 



5° 84 •* 



X*' 



D o 







<y % * o « ° A' 



I 



V o 





£>. -. 







%b, *° • * * A 

V 4< : 




.<& 






■'- J -: ■■ 




Subarea boundary 

DOMES Site B 

No nodules observed or recovered 

Nodules present, no assays 

Ni plus Cu<1.8 wt pet 

Ni plus Cu 1.8-2.3 wt pet 

Ni plus Cu >2.3 wt pet 

Numbers next to symbols coincide 
with index numbers in Appendix B 



50 



Scale, km 
Bathymetric contours in meters below mean sea level 



8°L 
144° 



141 » 140" 139° 

Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in study area B. Topography adapted from Heezen (25). 










I 

















HECKMAN 

BINDERY INC. 




A" FEB 84 




152° 



FIGURE 5. • Station locations, nodule occurrences, and grades in study area A. Topography adapted from Heezen (25). 



\* 



p 









<* **TT** .0*" ^> '••» 









4.V e> 

\* .. * "°"° 

«fev* 





V 







' . . s * .0* 



&"» *+*>* 



HECKMAN 

BINDERY INC. 




rcj 



N. MANCHESTER, 
INDIANA 46962 






1 1 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



II II III II II I IW ™X fjr 

002 959 891 5 








m 



H 



Ml 












■ 



